Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 31, 2022

Ilganayev v. United Airlines, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:22-cv-07672
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Ilganayev v. United Airlines, Judge Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties reported an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Migir Ilganayev, and the defendant, United Airlines, Inc.; the case was closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle.

What happened

In Ilganayev v. United Airlines, the parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the agreement’s terms.

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered that neither party pay costs or attorneys’ fees. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

Judge Caproni allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days if they show good cause. If they want the court to retain authority to enforce their agreement, they must also submit the agreement and request that authority within the same 30-day period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ilganayev v. United Airlines, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-07672
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Oct. 31, 2022

Background

On October 27, 2022, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not provide the terms of that agreement.

Court’s Order

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 may apply to reopen the case within 30 days of the order. Any such application must show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the parties’ settlement and must be filed within that period. A request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause may be denied on that basis alone.

The order also states that, if the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction—the court’s authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they must submit the agreement under Rule 7.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining that jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, terminated the open motions, and closed the case. The order did not decide the underlying dispute on its merits.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.