Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
The United African-Asian Abilities Club, suing on behalf of itself and its member James Lee, initiated this action against 5222 and 5226 Lexington Ave LLC and ten Doe defendants in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The specific factual allegations underlying the complaint, such as the nature of the claims or the events giving rise to the dispute, are not detailed in the dismissal order. The case proceeded until the parties reached a resolution sufficient to warrant terminating the litigation.
On October 6, 2026, the parties jointly filed a Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice, indicating a mutual agreement to end the case permanently. The filing of a joint stipulation typically signifies that the parties have settled their dispute or otherwise resolved their differences without requiring judicial determination on the merits. The court reviewed the stipulation and found good cause to grant the requested relief.
The order was entered on October 20, 2026, by Judge Cynthia Valenzuela of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The court's docket reflects that the case was terminated and marked JS-6, the administrative designation for a final judgment closing the matter. No further proceedings remain pending in this action.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted the Joint Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice and ordered that the plaintiffs' complaint be dismissed with prejudice in its entirety. A dismissal with prejudice operates as a final adjudication on the merits, barring the plaintiffs from refiling the same claims against the same defendants in the future. The court's order reflects the parties' consent to this final disposition.
The court further ordered that each party shall bear its own respective attorney fees and costs. This provision indicates that the parties agreed to waive any claim for fee shifting or cost recovery against one another, a common term in negotiated settlements where each side absorbs its own litigation expenses.
The order was entered by Judge Cynthia Valenzuela on October 20, 2026, and the case was terminated. The dismissal resolves all claims against all defendants, including the Doe defendants, and leaves nothing further for the court to adjudicate.
Key Takeaways
- The case was terminated by a joint stipulation, confirming the parties reached a consensual resolution.
- The dismissal with prejudice permanently bars the plaintiffs from re-litigating the dismissed claims against these defendants.
- Each party bears its own attorney fees and costs, reflecting a standard mutual walkaway provision.
- No judicial analysis of the underlying merits or legal claims was performed or recorded in this order.
- The order constitutes a final, appealable judgment closing the case in its entirety.
Why It Matters
This order represents the routine judicial ratification of a private settlement agreement between the parties. It concludes the federal litigation without establishing any legal precedent or resolving any substantive legal questions. The disposition is significant only to the immediate parties, as it finalizes their agreement to end the dispute and allocates the financial burden of the litigation equally.
For the court system, the order reduces the docket by one case without expenditure of judicial resources on motion practice or trial. The dismissal with prejudice also provides the defendants with finality, protecting them from future litigation on the same claims. The order is a straightforward application of the court's authority to enforce the parties' voluntary resolution of their dispute.