United States of America et al v. Oudeh et al
Filing
207
ORDER - The court DENIES defendants' amended motion to set aside judgement 198 and DENIES defendants' motion for post-judgment discovery 203 . Signed by District Judge James C. Dever III on 4/25/2023. (Mann, Stephanie)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DMSION
No. 5:18-CV-9-D
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Plaintiffs,
v.
)
)
)
)
)
)
IBRAHIMN. OUDEH, etal.,
Defendants.
ORDER
)
)
)
)
On October 18, 2022, defendants Ibrahim N. Oudeh and Teresa Sloan-Oudeh (collectively,
"defendants") moved to set aside the judgment in this action [D.E. 198] and filed a memorandum
in support [D.E. 199]. On December 2, 2022, the United States of America and the State ofNorth
Carolina (collectively, ''plaintiffs" or "governments") responded in opposition [D.E. 201]. On
December 15, 2022, defendants moved for post-judgment discovery [D.E. 203] and filed a
memorandum in support [D.E. 204]. On December 27, 2022, the- governments responded in
opposition [D.E. 205]. As explained below, the court denies defendants' motions.
I.
On April 20, 2020, the parties reached a Settlement Agreement in this action and jointly
moved to implement the terms of the Settlement Agreement. See [D.E. 123]. On April 28, 2020,
the court signed an order implementing the Settlement Agreement [D.E. 126] and stipulation
dismissing the action. See [D.E. 127]. The stipulation of dismissal incorporated a Consent
I
Judgment that the parties signed. See id. at 1-2. The stipulation includes a provision that states:
Case 5:18-cv-00009-D Document 207 Filed 04/25/23 Page 1 of 11
"[a]s part. of the Settlement Agreement, Defendants agree to entry of the Consent
Judgment . . . against them at a future date if the Plaintiffs reasonably determine that certain
.~4°~11ID.filallc_es which ar~_
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?