Wee v. Charles David of California

Filing 14

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 11 Motion to Reopen Case. This action was dismissed on February 7, 2013 in an Order that recited that the Court had been advised that all claims had been settled. The Order of dismissal was conditioned upon the right of any party "to reopen the action within thirty (30) days if the settlement is not consummated." No application to reopen was made within the thirty (30) days and thus the dismissal became final and unconditional.... It is settled that the C ourt posses no inherent power to enforce a settlement, in the absence of an express retention of jurisdiction or the entry of the settlement terms as an order of the Court. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 378 (1994) ("Enforcement of the settlement agreement, however, whether through award of damages or decree of specific performance, is more than just a continuation or renewal of the dismissed suit, and hence requires its own basis for jurisdiction.") Plaintiff's motion (Dkt 11) is DENIED without prejudice to its right to proceed in a plenary action. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 10/9/2013) (ja)