Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 15, 2024

Volfman v. Kyoto Omen U.S.A, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:23-cv-10370
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Volfman v. Kyoto Omen, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs to either party.

Who this affects

Joseph Volfman; Kyoto Omen U.S.A, Inc. doing business as Omen Azen; and Paavo Rowe. The case was dismissed with prejudice, without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for reopening or requesting retained jurisdiction.

What happened

In Volfman v. Kyoto Omen U.S.A., Inc., the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, terminated all open motions, and closed the case. It dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered that neither party would pay costs or attorneys’ fees.

Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to seek reopening for good cause or to ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement, subject to specified filing requirements.

The detailed version

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

Case
Volfman v. Kyoto Omen U.S.A, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-10370
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Mar. 15, 2024

Background

On March 14, 2024, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state the claims or the terms of that agreement.

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 court stated that, within 30 days, the parties could apply to reopen the case by showing good cause for keeping it open despite their settlement. Requests filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis. The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, but they had to submit the agreement and a request for retained jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

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.