Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 7, 2022

Tavarez-Vargas v. Piggy LLC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:21-cv-09826
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

Tavarez-Vargas v. Piggy LLC was discontinued after settlement, with restoration allowed by April 7, 2022; Judge Vyskocil issued the order.

Who this affects

Carmen Tavarez-Vargas, Piggy LLC, and the people covered by the proposed group action were affected by the court’s settlement-based discontinuance and restoration deadline.

What happened

In Tavarez-Vargas v. Piggy LLC, the plaintiff told the court that the parties had reached a settlement.

The court discontinued the case without costs to either party and allowed the case to be restored to the court’s calendar if an application was filed by April 7, 2022.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no application to restore the case was filed by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting a new date.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tavarez-Vargas v. Piggy LLC · No. 1:21-cv-09826
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Mar. 7, 2022

Background

Carmen Tavarez-Vargas brought the action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against Piggy LLC. The court received a letter from the plaintiff stating that the parties had reached a settlement.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if an application to restore it was made by April 7, 2022. The order states that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting a new date.

Effect

The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or resolve the underlying claims. The case was therefore closed subject to the stated deadline for seeking restoration.

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.