Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 24, 2022

Lopez v. Alfi International, Inc.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:21-cv-10817
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Lopez v. Alfi International, Inc., Judge Abrams discontinued the action after a reported settlement in principle, without fees or costs and subject to restoration within 45 days.

Who this affects

Victor Lopez, the putative class, and Alfi International, Inc.; the action was closed subject to a possible timely application to restore it.

What happened

In Lopez v. Alfi International, Inc., the court was told that all parties had reached a settlement in principle. The order does not provide the settlement’s terms.

The court discontinued the action without fees or costs to any party. It allowed an application to restore the case to be filed within 45 days of the order; later applications could be denied solely because they were late.

Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The court also said that any request for it to retain authority to enforce a settlement had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 45-day period.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Lopez v. Alfi International, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-10817
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Jan. 24, 2022

Background

Victor Lopez brought the action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated against Alfi International, Inc. The court stated that it had been informed that all parties had reached a settlement in principle. The order does not describe the claims or the settlement’s terms.

Court’s action

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without fees or costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 45 days. It stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.

The court further stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain authority to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 45-day period. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.