1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BRIAN WHITAKER, Case No. 21-cv-03504-DMR

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING EX PARTE 9 v. APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF STIPULATED JUDGMENT 10 MASARWEH GROUP, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 20 11 Defendant.

12 Plaintiff Brian Whitaker filed this action on May 11, 2021. He filed a notice of voluntary 13 dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(1) on November 14 10, 2021. [Docket No. 18.] On September 11, 2021, Plaintiff filed an ex parte application for 15 entry of a stipulated judgment for $9,000, asserting that Defendant Masarweh Group, Inc. has 16 defaulted on its obligations under the parties’ settlement agreement. He asks the court to enter a 17 stipulated judgment that the parties executed in October 2021 as part of their settlement. [Docket 18 No. 20.] 19 “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power authorized 20 by Constitution and statute. . . . It is to be presumed that a cause lies outside this limited 21 jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction.” 22 Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am.,

(1994) (citations omitted). 23 Enforcement of a settlement agreement “is more than just a continuation or renewal of the 24 dismissed suit, and hence requires its own basis for jurisdiction.”

. Accordingly, where 25 a settlement agreement results in dismissal of an action and the court has not retained jurisdiction 26 as part of the dismissal, any subsequent issues that arise are considered “a claim for breach of a 27 contract, part of the consideration for which was dismissal of an earlier federal suit.”

. 1 retain jurisdiction over the parties’ settlement agreement. Accordingly, the court lacks jurisdiction 2 || to enforce the settlement agreement. Any action to enforce the agreement must be brought in state 3 court as a breach of contract claim. See Kokkonen,

(in the absence of action by 4 || the court to retain jurisdiction as part of a dismissal, “enforcement of the settlement agreement is 5 for state courts.”); Hagestad v. Tragesser,

(9th Cir. 1995) (holding that district 6 || court lacked jurisdiction to enforce settlement where it did not expressly retain jurisdiction and did 7 not incorporate the terms of the settlement into the dismissal, even though the judge stated at 8 settlement conference that he intended to retain jurisdiction). Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for entry of judgment is denied. Tj 10 SS © 11 IT IS SO ORDERED LS = 12 || Dated: September 14, 2023 Z2/(Wr10 is □□ JD — L\ Wo@iadé. Ryu. M. □□□ □□ 14 eh fia bgte daaabe □□ o> 1S oN OY Ly Sy DISTRICS = 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28