Mejia v. The Fruit Guys, LLC

Background

Jose Mejia sued The Fruit Guys, LLC individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. On August 25, 2022, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Court’s Orders

The court ordered that all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines be canceled. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The parties were allowed 30 days to apply to reopen the case. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. The court stated that a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.

The court also explained that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Effect on Putative Class Members

The court directed the Clerk to remove the language “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated” from the caption. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs certain class-action settlements, the dismissal and any settlement operated only between Mejia and The Fruit Guys. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice, ordered the case closed, and limited the effect of the dismissal and any settlement to the individual plaintiff and defendant.