Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 28, 2023

Frenzy Technologies, Inc. v. Frosted, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-01223
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

Frenzy Technologies v. Frosted: Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by March 30, 2023.

Who this affects

Frenzy Technologies, Inc. and Frosted, Inc.; the action was discontinued, with restoration available by March 30, 2023, and dismissal with prejudice if no restoration application was made by then.

What happened

In Frenzy Technologies, Inc. v. Frosted, Inc., Frosted told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle and asked for more time to respond to the complaint.

Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it by March 30, 2023. If no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also postponed all other dates and deadlines indefinitely, including Frosted’s deadline to respond to the complaint.

The detailed version

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

Case
Frenzy Technologies, Inc. v. Frosted, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-01223
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Feb. 28, 2023

Background

The court received a letter from Frosted, Inc., doing business as Whop.com, stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. Frosted requested an extension of time to respond to Frenzy Technologies, Inc.’s complaint.

Court’s action

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 if an application to restore was made by March 30, 2023. The order states that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal of the action would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines indefinitely, including the deadline to respond to the complaint.

Effect

The order ended the action subject to the stated restoration deadline. The opinion does not decide the parties’ underlying claims or describe the settlement’s terms. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil signed the order on February 28, 2023.

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.