From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coretek Licensing LLC v. Aircall. IO, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Sep 26, 2022
22-CV-4471 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 26, 2022)

Opinion

22-CV-4471 (JGK)

09-26-2022

CORETEK LICENSING LLC, Plaintiff, v. AIRCALL. IO, INC., Defendant.


ORDER

JOHN G. KOELTL, DISTRICT JUDGE

It having been reported to this Court that the parties have reached a settlement-in-principle in this action, it is hereby ordered that this matter be discontinued with prejudice but without costs; provided, however, that within 60 days of the date of this order, counsel for the plaintiff may apply by letter for restoration of the action to the calendar of the undersigned, in which event the action will be restored.

Any application to reopen must be filed within sixty (60) days of this order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, if the parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the same sixty-day period to be so-ordered by the Court. Unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement unless it is made part of the public record.

All pending motions are dismissed as moot. All conferences arc canceled The Clerk of Close is directed Lo close this"case.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Coretek Licensing LLC v. Aircall. IO, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Sep 26, 2022
22-CV-4471 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 26, 2022)
Case details for

Coretek Licensing LLC v. Aircall. IO, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CORETEK LICENSING LLC, Plaintiff, v. AIRCALL. IO, INC., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Sep 26, 2022

Citations

22-CV-4471 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 26, 2022)