Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 28, 2022

Contreras v. Printful, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:21-cv-10165
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Contreras v. Printful, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration by May 28, 2022 before dismissal becomes with prejudice.

Who this affects

Yensy Contreras, the people she sought to represent, and Printful, Inc.; the order discontinued their case and set a May 28, 2022 deadline for seeking restoration.

What happened

Contreras v. Printful, Inc. involved Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, and Printful, Inc. The court received a letter from the plaintiff stating that the parties had reached a settlement.

The court discontinued the case without costs to either party and allowed it to be restored to the court’s calendar if an application was made by May 28, 2022. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also postponed all other dates and deadlines indefinitely.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the dismissal order on April 28, 2022. The order did not describe the settlement’s terms or decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Contreras v. Printful, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-10165
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Apr. 28, 2022

Background

Yensy Contreras brought the case individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated against Printful, Inc. The opinion states that the court received a letter from the plaintiff reporting that the parties had reached a settlement. It does not provide the settlement’s terms or explain the underlying claims.

Ruling

The court ordered that the case be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the case to the court’s calendar. The parties had to apply for restoration by May 28, 2022. If no application was made by that date, the court stated that the dismissal of the action would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be restored through that procedure. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines indefinitely.

Disposition

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered an order of dismissal based on the reported settlement. The order did not resolve the merits of the claims.

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.