WatchGuard Technologies, Inc. v. iValue InfoSolutions Pvt. Ltd.

Filing 49

ORDER by Hon. Brian A Tsuchida. The Court has been tasked with determining whether both parties' signatures are necessary to effectuate the settlement agreement. In short, the issue put to the Court is essentially one of contract formation. The parties are thus entitled to an evidentiary hearing. The Court therefore ORDERS:1. The parties shall each advise the Court on the record no later than August 3, 2017 whether they wish to request an evidentiary hearing, or prefer that the Court draw all necessary factual conclusions based on the evidentiary record to date; and 2. No later than August 3, 2017, the parties shall propose a stipulated amended case management schedule for all remaining pretrial a nd trial dates, including the discovery completion date of July 31, 2017. See Dkts. 25 , 38 .3. The Court RESERVES ruling on the parties motions to seal until the time it rules on the pending Motion to Enforce Settlement. The parties are cautioned the Court is inclined to preserve the public right to access any court records associated with any evidentiary hearing.(AE)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 8 WATCHGUARD TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, 9 10 11 ORDER v. IVALUE INFOSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., Defendant. 12 13 CASE NO. C15-1697-BAT This matter comes before the Court on defendant iValue Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd.’s 14 (“defendant”) Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement, filed under seal pending the Court’s 15 consideration of concomitant motions to seal. See SEALED Dkt. 30; see also Dkts. 26, 31, 34. 16 The matter is fully briefed. See SEALED Dkts. 29, 30, 32, 35-37. In opposing the motion, 17 plaintiff Watchguard Technologies, Inc. (“plaintiff”) contends the terms of the proposed 18 agreement show the parties did not intend for it to become effective until both parties had signed 19 it, which has not yet occurred. SEALED Dkt. 32; see also Dkt. 48. 20 A trial court may “summarily enforce . . . a settlement agreement entered into by the 21 litigants” while the litigation is pending. In re City Equities Anaheim, Ltd., 22 F.3d 954, 957 22 (9th Cir. 1994). Nevertheless, the court may only do so when the settlement agreement is 23 “complete.” Callie v. Near, 829 F.2d 888, 890 (9th Cir. 1987). Thus, where material facts ORDER - 1 1 concerning the existence or terms of an agreement to settle are in dispute, the court must hold an 2 evidentiary hearing to resolve such issues. Id. at 890. 3 The Court has been tasked with determining whether both parties’ signatures are 4 necessary to effectuate the settlement agreement. In short, the issue put to the Court is 5 essentially one of contract formation. The parties are thus entitled to an evidentiary hearing. See 6 id. The Court therefore ORDERS: 7 8 9 10 1. The parties shall each advise the Court on the record no later than August 3, 2017 whether they wish to request an evidentiary hearing, or prefer that the Court draw all necessary factual conclusions based on the evidentiary record to date; and 2. No later than August 3, 2017, the parties shall propose a stipulated amended case management schedule for all remaining pretrial and trial dates, including the discovery completion date of July 31, 2017. See Dkts. 25, 38. 11 12 13 3. The Court RESERVES ruling on the parties’ motions to seal until the time it rules on the pending Motion to Enforce Settlement. The parties are cautioned the Court is inclined to preserve the public right to access any court records associated with any evidentiary hearing. 14 The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to all counsel of record. 15 DATED this 31st day of July, 2017. 16 A 17 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 ORDER - 2

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?