Blackbird Tech LLC v. Swissco LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-02783
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Blackbird Tech v. Swissco ended after mediation, with Judge Abrams discontinuing the action and allowing restoration within 30 days.
Blackbird Tech LLC and Swissco LLC; the action was closed after the parties reached a settlement, subject to the stated 30-day restoration and settlement-enforcement conditions.
What happened
In Blackbird Tech LLC v. Swissco LLC, the court reported that mediation succeeded and the parties reached an agreement on all issues.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it within 30 days. The order does not describe the settlement terms or decide the underlying dispute.
Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The court said any request to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Blackbird Tech LLC v. Swissco LLC · No. 1:22-cv-02783
- Ronnie Abrams
- Feb. 7, 2023
Background
The court stated that mediation had been successful and that Blackbird Tech LLC and Swissco LLC had reached an agreement on all issues. The opinion does not provide the agreement's terms or explain the underlying claims.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court's docket if an application to restore was made within 30 days. It stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to place the agreement's terms on the public record and obtain the court's approval within the same 30-day period. Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Effect
This order closed the case after settlement without deciding the merits of the parties' dispute. The order does not state the settlement's terms or allocate responsibility for any payment or other performance.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.