Taylor v. Trigeno

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: _________________ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 6/13/2024 ----------------------------------------------------------------- X : ROY JOAQUIN TAYLOR, : : Plaintiff, : 1:16-cv-1143-GHW : -v- : ORDER : CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., : : Defendants. : : ----------------------------------------------------------------- X GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge: On March 25, 2024, the Court referred this matter to Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang for settlement purposes. Dkt. No 299. Following a settlement conference held on June 4, 2024 before Judge Wang, the Court has been informed that this case has settled. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this action be conditionally discontinued without prejudice and without costs; provided, however, that within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order, the parties may submit to the Court their own Stipulation of Settlement and Dismissal.1 Otherwise, within such time Plaintiff may apply by letter for restoration of the action to the active calendar of this Court in the event that the settlement is not consummated. Upon such application for reinstatement, the parties shall continue to be subject to the Court’s jurisdiction, the Court shall promptly reinstate the action to its active docket, and the parties shall be directed to appear before the Court, without the necessity of additional process, on a date within ten (10) days of the application, to schedule remaining pretrial proceedings and/or dispositive motions, as appropriate. This Order shall be deemed a final discontinuance of the action with prejudice in the event that

1 As explained in Rule 4(E) of the Court’s Individual Rules of Practice in Civil Cases, the Court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce confidential settlement agreements. If the parties wish that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, the parties must place the terms of their settlement agreement on the public record. Plaintiff has not requested restoration of the case to the active calendar within such 30-day period. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions, adjourn all remaining dates, and to close this case. ‘The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: June 13, 2024 New York, New York F\ oe Ui Qeecd Hoss H. WOODS United States District Judge