Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TAMARA WAREKA a/k/a TAMARA Case No.: 3:25-cv-03804-GPC-DDL WILLIAMS, 12 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S Plaintiff, 13 MOTION TO ENFORCE v. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 14 THE SD MED SPA LLC and DOES 1 15 [ECF No. 13] through 10 inclusive, 16 Defendants. 17 18 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement. ECF 19 No. 13. No opposition was filed by Defendant. Based on the reasoning below, the Court 20 GRANTS Defendants’ motion to enforce settlement. 21 BACKGROUND 22 On December 29, 2025, Plaintiff Tamara Wareka (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint 23 against Defendant The SD Med Spa LLC (“Defendant”), alleging copyright infringement 24 under 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. ECF No. 1. On January 29, 2026, the clerk of the court 25 filed an entry of default. ECF No. 7. On February 10, 2026, the parties filed a joint 26 motion to set aside default, which the Court granted. ECF Nos. 7, 8. 27 1 On March 4, 2026, the parties filed a notice of settlement. ECF No. 9. On March 2 28, 2026, the parties entered into their written settlement agreement. ECF No. 13 at 4-5. 3 The settlement agreement included the following terms: 4 • Defendant will pay Plaintiff $10,000.00 in four equal payments of $2,500.00 each 5 on or before March 25, 2026; April 24, 2026; May 25, 2026; and June 24, 2026, 6 see id., Exhibit A ¶ 3; 7 • Payment shall be made via credit card or ACH withdrawals, and Defendant will 8 provide Plaintiff’s counsel with the credit card or banking information so 9 Plaintiff’s counsel can initiate the payments, see id., Exhibit A ¶ 4; and 10 • Within five (5) business days of the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement, 11 Plaintiff will file a Joint Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice of the 12 SDCA Action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 with the United States District Court 13 for the Southern District of California with a request that the Court retain 14 jurisdiction over the SDCA Action for the purposes of enforcing the terms of the 15 Agreement, see id., Exhibit A ¶ 6. 16 On March 30, 2026, the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. 17 Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). ECF No. 11. The parties stipulated that Plaintiff would voluntarily 18 dismiss the action as to Defendant, but the effectiveness of the stipulation of dismissal 19 was conditioned upon the Court’s entry of an order retaining jurisdiction of this matter 20 until June 10, 2026 to enforce the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement. Id. at 2. 21 That same day, the Court granted the joint motion to dismiss and retained jurisdiction 22 over the matter until June 10, 2026 to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. ECF 23 No. 12. 24 While Defendant had provided Plaintiff’s counsel with credit card information, the 25 first $2,500 payment was declined twice on March 30, 2026. ECF No. 13 at 6. Plaintiff’s 26 counsel immediately notified Defendant’s counsel that the card declined twice and 27 1 demanded that Defendant provide H&A with an alternate method of payment. Id. Two 2 days later, Defendant’s counsel provided banking information for Defendant’s Wells 3 Fargo account, but the payment would not go through because the routing number was 4 invalid. Id. 5 Defendant’s counsel then provided revised bank account information. Id. 6 Plaintiff’s counsel ran the electronic payment on April 2, 2026, however it was rejected 7 by Wells Fargo a week later on April 9, 2026. Id. Plaintiff’s counsel demanded that 8 Defendant overnight H&A a certified check or money order by the close of business on 9 April 10, 2026. Id. at 7. Defendant advised him that the money had not been drafted out 10 of the bank account, and there was no sign of an attempted ACH payment. Id. On April 11 14, 2026, Defendant’s counsel provided Plaintiff’s counsel with a screenshot from 12 Defendant’s Wells Fargo banking application with information differing from previous 13 information provided. Id. On April 14, 2026, Plaintiff’s counsel ran the payment, and on 14 April 17, 2026, it was rejected for a third time. Id. Plaintiff’s counsel attempted to run it a 15 fourth time on April 17, 2026, and it was rejected on April 22, 2026. Id. 16 On May 15, 2026, Plaintiff filed this instant motion to enforce the settlement 17 agreement. ECF No. 13. Defendant did not file an opposition. 18 DISCUSSION 19 A district court has the inherent power to summarily enforce, by way of motion, a 20 settlement agreement entered into while the litigation is pending before it. In re City of 21 Equities Anaheim, Ltd., 22 F.3d 954, 957 (9th Cir. 1994); Callie v. Near, 829 F.2d 888, 22 890 (9th Cir. 1987). “To be enforced, a settlement agreement must meet two 23 requirements. First, it must be a complete agreement meaning “the parties have reached 24 agreement on all material terms.” Callie, 829 F.2d at 891. Second, both parties “must 25 have either agreed to the terms of the settlement or authorized their respective counsel to 26 27 1 settle the dispute.” Marks-Forman v. Reporter Pub. Co., 12 F. Supp. 2d 1089, 1092 2 ||(S.D. Cal. 1998) (internal citations omitted). 3 Here, the parties agreed to and entered into their written settlement agreement on 4 || March 28, 2026. According to the settlement agreement, Defendant agreed to pay 5 || Plaintiff a total of $10,000 by June 24, 2026. Defendant, however, has not paid Plaintiff 6 ||in accordance with the settlement agreement. Thus, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's 7 motion. 8 CONCLUSION 9 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to enforce the settlement 10 ||agreement. The Court enters judgement in the amount of $10,000 against Defendant. The 11 ||Court VACATES the hearing set for August 7, 2026. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 || Dated: July 28, 2026 72 st 14 Hon. athe Coke 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3:25-cv-03804-GPC-DDL