Mejia v. Casa de Fanelli LLC

Background

Richard Mejia sued Casa di Fanelli LLC individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The parties notified the court on July 28, 2022, that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Action

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The clerk 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 also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Class-Action Effect

The court directed the clerk to remove the language stating that Mejia 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 Mejia and Casa di Fanelli LLC. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, directed that the case be closed, and limited the effect of the dismissal and settlement to the individual plaintiff and defendant. The order did not decide the underlying claims on their merits.