Mejia v. Clio Snacks LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-02905
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Mejia v. Clio Snacks, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.
Richard Mejia, the other people identified in the complaint as similarly situated, and Clio Snacks LLC. The action was closed subject to a possible application to restore it within 30 days.
What happened
Mejia v. Clio Snacks LLC involved Richard Mejia’s case against Clio Snacks LLC. The court was told that the case had been settled and that the parties were finalizing a settlement agreement.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. It allowed either party to seek restoration of the case within 30 days, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also said that any settlement-enforcement request would require the agreement’s terms to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Mejia v. Clio Snacks LLC · No. 1:22-cv-02905
- Ronnie Abrams
- June 3, 2022
Background
Richard Mejia brought this action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against Clio Snacks LLC. The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled and that the parties were finalizing a settlement agreement.
Court’s Order
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without 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 30 days. It stated that an application to reopen filed after that period might be denied solely because it was late.
The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority to enforce the settlement agreement—the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Disposition
The order discontinued the action and closed the case; it did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.