Dominguez v. Sonesta International Hotels Corporation

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States
 District Court
Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BERTHA DOMINGUEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
SONESTA INTERNATIONAL HOTELS
CORPORATION,
Defendant.
Case No. 22-cv-03027-JCS
ORDER FOR PARTIES TO FILE
JOINT STATEMENT AND
STIPULATED DISMISSAL
The parties have informed the Court that they have reached a resolution of the case and
request that the Court enter an order dismissing the case with prejudice. Because this case was
brought as a putative class action, the Court is required under Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure and Diaz v. Trust Territory of Pac. Islands, 876 F.2d 1401, 1408 (9th Cir. 1989)
to conduct a limited review to ensure that dismissal of the case will not result in prejudice to the
absent putative class members. In particular, the Court must consider potential prejudice from: (1)
“possible reliance on the filing of the action if they are likely to know of it either because of
publicity or other circumstances”; (2) “lack of adequate time for class members to file other
actions, because of a rapidly approaching statute of limitations”; and (3) “any settlement or
concession of class interests made by the class representative or counsel in order to further their
own interests.” Diaz, 876 F.2d at 1408; see also Lyons v. Bank of Am., NA, No. C 11-1232 CW,
2012 WL 5940846, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 27, 2012) (observing that “Courts in this district have
expressed some uncertainty about whether Rule 23(e) still applies to pre-certification settlement
proposals in the wake of the 2003 amendments to the rule but have generally assumed that it
Case 3:22-cv-03027-JCS Document 47 Filed 02/17/26 Page 1 of 2

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
does”) (citing cases).
Accordingly, the parties are requested to supply a joint statement, with a supporting
declaration if appropriate, addressing why dismissal with prejudice is consistent with Diaz. In
addition, the parties shall file a stipulated dismissal that makes clear that while the claims of the
named plaintiff will be dismissed with prejudice, claims of putative class members will be
dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 17, 2026
______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:22-cv-03027-JCS Document 47 Filed 02/17/26 Page 2 of 2