Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 17, 2022

IN RE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT BONDS ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:18-cv-02830
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureAntitrust
In one sentence

In re Mexican Government Bonds Antitrust Litigation: Judge Oetken granted a request for final judgment and ordered the Clerk to close the case.

Who this affects

The parties in the case and the Clerk of Court were affected: the Clerk was directed to enter final judgment and close the case.

What happened

In re Mexican Government Bonds Antitrust Litigation involved a request filed at Docket Number 280. The opinion states that all served defendants had been dismissed, while only unserved defendants remained.

The court concluded that there was no reason to delay final judgment because no further decisions were expected in the case. It therefore granted the request.

Judge James Oetken directed the Clerk of Court to enter final judgment under Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
IN RE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT BONDS ANTITRUST LITIGATION · No. 1:18-cv-02830
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Aug. 17, 2022

Order

The court granted the letter request at Docket Number 280. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter final judgment under Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Reasoning

The court stated that all served defendants had been dismissed and that only unserved defendants remained. Relying on cited Second Circuit precedent, the court explained that immediate entry of final judgment was appropriate because there was no basis to expect further adjudications in the action.

Disposition

Judge J. Paul Oetken ordered the Clerk to enter final judgment and close the case. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the earlier dismissals in detail.

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.