Williams v. HM.Clause, Inc.

Background

On June 30, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the terms of the agreement.

Rulings

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The order allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the parties’ settlement. The order stated that a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.

The court also explained that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the power to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the agreement and a request for an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Class-Related Effect

The court directed the Clerk to remove the language stating that Williams sued individually and for others similarly situated. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs certain class settlements and dismissals, the dismissal and any settlement operated only between Williams and HM.Clause, Inc. It did not bind absent putative class members.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the case following the parties’ reported agreement in principle and did not decide the underlying claims. Judge Valerie Caproni entered the dismissal with prejudice and closed the case, subject to the order’s 30-day provisions.