Urbanimage Media LTD v. CR Fashion Book Ltd.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-06088
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Urbanimage Media v. CR Fashion Book, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs to either party.
Urbanimage Media Ltd. and CR Fashion Book Ltd.; the case was closed after the parties reported reaching an agreement in principle.
What happened
Urbanimage Media Ltd. and CR Fashion Book Ltd. told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, and directed the Clerk to close the case and terminate pending motions.
Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to request reopening for good cause; they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a request within that period.
The detailed version
- Urbanimage Media LTD v. CR Fashion Book Ltd. · No. 1:23-cv-06088
- Valerie Caproni
- Sept. 7, 2023
Background
On September 6, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues in the case.
Order
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 could apply to reopen the case within 30 days. The application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.
The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.
Disposition
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs to either party, based on the parties’ agreement in principle. The order did not decide the underlying claims on their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.