2:20-cv-09825 · Central District of California No recent activity
WHAT HAPPENED — IN PLAIN ENGLISH
Plaintiff Rovier Carrington filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with prejudice in Entry #52 on February 17, 2021, effectively ending this case against Harvey Weinstein and multiple media defendants. This dismissal resolves the Court's January 25 Order to Show Cause (Entry #50) that required plaintiff to justify why the case shouldn't be dismissed due to an SDNY order. No immediate action is required before 9 AM as the case has been voluntarily dismissed with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled.
Updated March 30, 2026
Know someone else involved in this case? Share this page.
Ada is free because people like you keep it running.
100% of contributions fund free legal intelligence for people who can't afford a lawyer. Lesson of the Day, PBC.
YOUR CASE FILE
Entry #52 (Feb 17): Plaintiff filed Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with prejudice, case is now closed
Entry #51 (Feb 8): Joint status report filed by all defendants including major media companies (Brian Graden Media, Paramount, ViacomCBS, National Amusements) with exhibit attachment
Entry #50 (Jan 25): Judge Phillips denied plaintiff's extension request as moot and issued Order to Show Cause requiring response by Feb 5, 2021, referencing an SDNY order
All case deadlines were stayed until further order, but dismissal moots this issue
WHAT THE OTHER SIDE DID
The dismissal came just 9 days after defendants filed a joint status report, suggesting coordinated defense pressure may have contributed to plaintiff's decision to abandon the case
The voluntary dismissal with prejudice (cannot be refiled) rather than without prejudice indicates either a settlement or recognition that the case was unwinnable, particularly given the Court's skeptical Order to Show Cause referencing adverse SDNY proceedings
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR YOUR CASE
The dismissal with prejudice suggests either a confidential settlement or plaintiff's recognition of fatal case weaknesses, particularly given the Court's reference to adverse SDNY proceedings that were undermining this action
This outcome demonstrates the effectiveness of coordinated defense strategy among multiple sophisticated defendants and their counsel in complex entertainment industry litigation
Get daily updates on this case
Every morning at 5 AM, in plain English.
Free ($0/mo): Everything Ada knows — all 4 layers on the page and in email. What happened, your case file, what the other side did, what it means.
Personal ($19/mo): Everything in Free, delivered daily at 5 AM — plus deadline alerts. Ada warns you 7 days, 3 days, and 1 day before any court deadline. Never miss a filing date.SUBSCRIBE →
Multi ($49/mo): Everything in Personal for up to 5 cases. Perfect for small business owners, repeat litigants, or family law.SUBSCRIBE →
Professional ($299/mo): For legal teams and executive assistants. Unlimited cases, white-label, custom sources.SUBSCRIBE →