Lexmark International, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “[a] dismissal with prejudice operates as an adjudication on the merits, so it ordinarily precludes future claims” (quotation marks and citation omitted)
• noting that plaintiff “failed to move to reopen during the specified period for doing so”
• noting that dismissal with prejudice may be based on “sanction for failure to follow court rules”
• stating “[a] dismissal with prejudice ‘operates as an adjudication on the merits,’ so it ordinarily precludes future claims” (quoting Landon v. Hunt, 977 F.2d 829, 832–33 (3d Cir. 1992))
• “A dismissal with prejudice ‘operates as an adjudication on the merits,’ so it ordinarily precludes future claims.”
• “Only a clear and explicit statement will suffice to make a dismissal involuntary, or voluntary with prejudice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).