1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 K.W., et al., Case No. 21-cv-00976-CRB 9 Plaintiffs, 10 v. ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS 11 EPIC GAMES, INC., 12 Defendant. 13 The Court GRANTS Defendant Epic Games, Inc.’s unopposed motion to dismiss 14 || this action. Mot. (dkt. 52). To determine whether Plaintiffs’ claims are precluded by a 15 || state court judgment, the Court looks to the claim preclusion rules of the relevant state. 16 || See Hesse v. Sprint Corp.,

(9th Cir. 2010). Plaintiffs participated in a 5 17 || nationwide class settlement with Epic Games in North Carolina state court. See Zanca v. 5 18 |} Epic Games, Inc., No. 21-CVS-534 (N.C. Super. Ct., Wake County). The settlement is 19 || final, and all appeals have been withdrawn. See Jacobson Decl. (dkt. 52-1) 92 & Ex. A. 20 || All parties agree that, under North Carolina law, the Settlement Agreement releases the 21 || claims Plaintiffs raised in this case. See Mot. at 2, Jacobson Decl. Ex. B (Settlement 22 || Agreement). This case is therefore DISMISSED with prejudice. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: May 2, 2022 a 5 ~ CHARLES R. BREYER 25 United States District Judge 26 27 28