Contreras v. Follett Higher Education Group, Inc.

Background

Yensy Contreras sued Follett Higher Education Group, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. On January 27, 2022, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Order

The court cancelled 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 parties were permitted 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 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 to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Putative Class

Judge Valerie Caproni directed the Clerk to remove from the caption the language stating that Contreras sued individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), the dismissal and any settlement were operative only between Contreras and Follett. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Classification Basis

This was a procedural order resolving the case based on the parties’ agreement and the court’s dismissal order. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims on their merits.