Fusa Franchisor SPV LLC v. Moda Collision Repair, LLC
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Janis L. Sammartino (author)
Analysis
The court considered a joint stipulation for dismissal filed by the plaintiff and one defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The court approved the stipulation, dismissed all claims with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction for six months to enforce the parties' settlement agreement.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Approved the Stipulation for Dismissal and dismissed all claims with prejudice.“Good cause appearing, the Court APPROVES the Stipulation and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE all claims that were asserted or could have been asserted in this action, with each party to bear its own costs and fees.” | agree with court The dismissal with prejudice based on a joint stipulation is procedurally proper under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) and aligns with the parties' agreement to resolve the matter. |
Retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement for a period not to exceed six months.“Further, as requested in the Stipulation, the Court will retain jurisdiction over the Parties to enforce the terms of their settlement agreement for a period not to exceed six months from the date of this Order.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the principle that federal courts may retain jurisdiction to enforce settlement agreements, citing Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am. and Seldon v. George Brown Sports Club - Palm, LLC. |
The order itself: sound — The order is a standard procedural disposition of a joint stipulation for dismissal. It correctly cites the relevant rule (Rule 41(a)) and appropriate case law (Kokkonen) to support the retention of jurisdiction for settlement enforcement. The reasoning is sufficient for the type of order issued.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FUSA FRANCHISOR SPV LLC, a Case No.: 23-CV-1559 JLS (BJC) Delaware limited liability company, 12 ORDER APPROVING Plaintiff, 13 STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL v. 14 (ECF No. 26) MODA COLLISION REPAIR, LLC dba 15 FIX AUTO VANCOUVER-WALNUT 16 GROVE, a Washington limited liability company; and ANDREY STEFANCO, an 17 individual, 18 Defendants. 19 20 Presently before the Court is the Stipulation for Dismissal (“Stip.,” ECF No. 26) 21 filed jointly by Plaintiff Fusa Franchisor SPV LLC and Defendant Andrey Stefanco 22 (collectively, the “Parties”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). Good cause 23 appearing, the Court APPROVES the Stipulation and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE 24 all claims that were asserted or could have been asserted in this action, with each party to 25 bear its own costs and fees. Further, as requested in the Stipulation, the Court will retain 26 jurisdiction over the Parties to enforce the terms of their settlement agreement for a period 27 not to exceed six months from the date of this Order. See Seldon v. George Brown Sports 28 Club - Palm, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-01421-DAD-SAB, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1246, at *1 1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 2, 2019) (“Federal courts may, within their discretion, retain jurisdiction 2 || over settlement agreements reached out of court.” (citing Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. 3 || Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381 (1994))). 4 As this concludes the litigation in this matter, the Clerk of the Court SHALL 5 || CLOSE the file. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 ||Dated: August 13, 2024 jae L. Lo memeaite- g on. Janis L. Sammartino 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28