K.W. v. Epic Games, Inc.

N.D. California

K.W. v. Epic Games, Inc.

DecidedMay 2, 2022

Docket3:21-cv-00976

StatusUnknown

This text of K.W. v. Epic Games, Inc. (K.W. v. Epic Games, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

K.W. v. Epic Games, Inc., (N.D. Cal. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 K.W., et al., Case No. 21-cv-00976-CRB 9 Plaintiffs, 10 v. ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS 11 EPIC GAMES, INC., 12 Defendant. 13 The Court GRANTS Defendant Epic Games, Inc.’s unopposed motion to dismiss 14 || this action. Mot. (dkt. 52). To determine whether Plaintiffs’ claims are precluded by a 15 || state court judgment, the Court looks to the claim preclusion rules of the relevant state. 16 || See Hesse v. Sprint Corp., 595 F.3d 581, 587 (9th Cir. 2010). Plaintiffs participated in a 5 17 || nationwide class settlement with Epic Games in North Carolina state court. See Zanca v. 5 18 |} Epic Games, Inc., No. 21-CVS-534 (N.C. Super. Ct., Wake County). The settlement is 19 || final, and all appeals have been withdrawn. See Jacobson Decl. (dkt. 52-1) 92 & Ex. A. 20 || All parties agree that, under North Carolina law, the Settlement Agreement releases the 21 || claims Plaintiffs raised in this case. See Mot. at 2, Jacobson Decl. Ex. B (Settlement 22 || Agreement). This case is therefore DISMISSED with prejudice. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: May 2, 2022 a 5 ~ CHARLES R. BREYER 25 United States District Judge 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 K.W., et al., Case No. 21-cv-00976-CRB 9 Plaintiffs, 10 v. ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS 11 EPIC GAMES, INC., 12 Defendant. 13 The Court GRANTS Defendant Epic Games, Inc.’s unopposed motion to dismiss 14 || this action. Mot. (dkt. 52). To determine whether Plaintiffs’ claims are precluded by a 15 || state court judgment, the Court looks to the claim preclusion rules of the relevant state. 16 || See Hesse v. Sprint Corp., 595 F.3d 581, 587 (9th Cir. 2010). Plaintiffs participated in a 5 17 || nationwide class settlement with Epic Games in North Carolina state court. See Zanca v. 5 18 |} Epic Games, Inc., No. 21-CVS-534 (N.C. Super. Ct., Wake County). The settlement is 19 || final, and all appeals have been withdrawn. See Jacobson Decl. (dkt. 52-1) 92 & Ex. A. 20 || All parties agree that, under North Carolina law, the Settlement Agreement releases the 21 || claims Plaintiffs raised in this case. See Mot. at 2, Jacobson Decl. Ex. B (Settlement 22 || Agreement). This case is therefore DISMISSED with prejudice. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: May 2, 2022 a 5 ~ CHARLES R. BREYER 25 United States District Judge 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

K.W. v. Epic Games, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kw-v-epic-games-inc-cand-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack