Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 30, 2023

Cibao Meat Products, Inc. v. Del Caribe Meat, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:23-cv-04388
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

Cibao Meat v. Del Caribe: Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, without costs or attorneys’ fees, while allowing limited reopening.

Who this affects

Cibao Meat Products, Inc., Del Caribe Meat, Inc., and Super Vega Cheeses, Inc.; the case was closed after the parties reported reaching an agreement in principle.

What happened

Cibao Meat Products, Inc. v. Del Caribe Meat, Inc. involved an agreement in principle that the parties said resolved all issues. The court therefore canceled the scheduled conferences and other deadlines.

The court dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered that neither party pay costs or attorneys’ fees. It directed the Clerk to terminate all open motions and close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties to seek reopening within 30 days by showing good cause. She also said they could ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a specific request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cibao Meat Products, Inc. v. Del Caribe Meat, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04388
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Aug. 30, 2023

Background

On August 29, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not state the terms of that 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 of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The parties were permitted to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The order states that a request filed after 30 days, or filed without a showing of good cause, could be denied solely on that basis.

The order also addressed enforcement of the settlement. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement under Rule 7.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining that authority, both within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

This was a procedural dismissal based on the parties’ reported settlement, not a decision on the underlying dispute. Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the case dismissed with prejudice, without costs or attorneys’ fees, and closed the case subject to the stated 30-day procedures.

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.