JUDGMENT

DAVID O. CARTER, District Judge.

On April 30, 2018, the Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Deutsch-Hollandische Tabakgesellschaft mbH & Co., KG's ("DHT's") motion for partial summary judgment. The Court granted summary judgment as follows:

The Court denied partial summary judgment on Trend Settah, Inc.'s counterclaims for breach of implied warranties, which proceeded to trial. (ECF No. 62.)

On DHT's claim for breach of contract against Trend Settah, Inc., the parties stipulated that Trend Settah, Inc. is liable to DHT for $482,708.52, inclusive of prejudgment interest accrued through April 23, 2018. (ECF No. 61.) The parties stipulate that an additional $2,063.78 in prejudgment interest will have accrued through June 18, 2018.

On June 4, 2018, this Court entered the Final Pretrial Conference Order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. (ECF No. 106.) On DHT's Counts One and Two for breach of contract and quantum meruit, the Final Pretrial Conference Order provided that "Trendsettah USA, Inc. and Trend Settah, Inc. stipulate that they are alter egos of each other and jointly and severally liable for [DHT's] judgment and to entry of this judgment against them. It further provided "[u]pon entry of the judgment the Court shall dismiss all remaining claims and grounds for relief that are asserted in Counts One and Two as moot," (id. at 7), and stated that it "shall supersede the pleadings." (Id. at 21.)

This action came on for trial on June 5, 2018, in Courtroom 9D of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable David O. Carter, United States District Judge, presiding. Trend Settah, Inc. appeared by its attorneys, Mark Poe, Randolph Gaw, and Samuel Song of Gaw | Poe LLP, and DHT appeared by its attorneys, Patrick Hanes and Justin Feinman of Williams Mullen, P.C.

A jury of eight persons was impaneled and sworn to try the action. After a three-day trial and after deliberations, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Trend Settah, Inc. and against DHT, on each of Trend Settah, Inc.'s causes of action tried: (1) breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, and (2) breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. The jury returned a verdict awarding Trend Settah, Inc. an undifferentiated $3,060,250.00 on those claims. The contents of the jury's verdict, which was filed on June 7, 2018, are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth fully herein. (ECF No. 114.)

The Court NOW ENTERS JUDGMENT AS FOLLOWS:

1. Judgment is entered in favor of DHT and against Trend Settah, Inc., and Trendsettah USA, Inc., jointly and severally, on DHT's claim for breach of contract in the amount of $484,772.30;

2. All remaining claims and grounds for relief asserted in DHT's Counts One and Two are dismissed as moot;

3. Judgment is entered in favor of DHT and against Trend Settah, Inc. and Trendsettah USA, Inc. on their counterclaim for breach of contract, and against Trendsettah USA, Inc. on its counterclaims for breach of implied warranties;

4. Judgment is entered in favor of Trend Settah, Inc. and against DHT on Trend Settah, Inc.'s counterclaims for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability and breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose in the amount of $3,060,250.00, plus prejudgment interest to the extent ordered by the Court, to be determined following Trend Settah, Inc.'s motion for the same;

5. Post-judgment interest shall run on these judgments in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961; and

6. Costs shall be recovered to the extent ordered by the Court.