Ravelo v. FCA US LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-03231
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ravelo v. FCA US LLC, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, without costs, and closed it.
Alfredo Ravelo and FCA US LLC; the case was dismissed with prejudice after the parties reported reaching an agreement in principle.
What happened
Ravelo v. FCA US LLC ended after the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, terminated all open motions, and directed the Clerk to close the case.
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The parties may ask to reopen it within 30 days by showing good cause; they may also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a proper request within that period.
The detailed version
- Ravelo v. FCA US LLC · No. 1:23-cv-03231
- Valerie Caproni
- Jan. 17, 2024
Background
On January 16, 2024, Alfredo Ravelo and FCA US LLC notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
Court’s 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 may apply to reopen the case within 30 days, but such an application must show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. A request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause may be denied on that basis alone.
If the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction—authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they must, within the same 30-day period, submit the settlement agreement as required by the court’s individual practices and request an order expressly retaining that authority.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.