Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 6, 2023

Guerrero v. 100% Made in the USA Bully Tools, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:22-cv-02466
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Guerrero v. 100% Made in the USA Bully Tools, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs.

Who this affects

Edelmira Guerrero and 100% Made in the USA Bully Tools, Inc. are bound by the dismissal and any settlement between them. Absent putative class members are not bound.

What happened

In Guerrero v. 100% Made in the USA Bully Tools, the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The case was brought by Edel mira Guerrero individually and on behalf of similarly situated people.

The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated open motions, and closed the case. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause. They could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by filing the settlement agreement and a request within that period.

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the caption changed to remove the language about similarly situated people. Because the parties had not told the court they intended to follow the class-settlement procedure, the dismissal and any settlement apply only between Guerrero and the defendant and do not bind absent potential class members.

The detailed version

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

Case
Guerrero v. 100% Made in the USA Bully Tools, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-02466
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Feb. 6, 2023

Background

The plaintiff, Edel mira Guerrero, sued 100% Made in the USA Bully Tools, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. The opinion states that, on February 3, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

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 of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The order allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The order also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the court’s authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request continued jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Class allegations

The court directed the Clerk to remove from the caption the language stating that Guerrero 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), which governs certain class settlements and dismissals, the court stated that the dismissal and any settlement operate only between Guerrero and the defendant. They do not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated the open motions, closed the case, and limited the effect of the dismissal and settlement to Guerrero and the defendant.

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.