Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 20, 2022

Boustead Securities, LLC v. G Medical Innovations Holdings LTD

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-04618
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

Boustead Securities v. G Medical Innovations, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by November 20, 2022.

Who this affects

Boustead Securities, LLC; G Medical Innovations Holdings LTD.; and G Medical Innovations USA Inc.

What happened

Boustead Securities, LLC sued G Medical Innovations Holdings LTD. and G Medical Innovations USA Inc.; the opinion says the parties reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put the settlement in writing and an application was made by November 20, 2022. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on October 20, 2022.

The detailed version

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

Case
Boustead Securities, LLC v. G Medical Innovations Holdings LTD · No. 1:22-cv-04618
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Oct. 20, 2022

Background

The court received a letter filed by a defendant stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement's terms.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court's calendar. Restoration was permitted if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing and made an application to restore the action by November 20, 2022. The order further states that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal of the action would be with prejudice.

Effect

The order resolved the case based on the reported settlement process rather than deciding the underlying claims. It did not award costs to either side.

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.