Matzura v. American Recorder Technologies, Inc.

Background

On July 31, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or the terms of the agreement.

Court’s Orders

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 could apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. A request filed after 30 days, or without a showing of good cause, could be denied solely on that basis.

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Putative Class

The court directed the clerk to remove from the caption the language stating that Matzura sued individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated people. 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-action settlements and dismissals, the dismissal and any settlement were operative only between Matzura and American Recorder Technologies, Inc. They did not bind absent putative class members—people who might have been members of the proposed class but were not parties to the case.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the case dismissed with prejudice and without costs, directed that the case be closed, and allowed the parties 30 days to seek reopening or retention of jurisdiction under the stated conditions.