From the linked opinion, I gather that Plaintiff Christopher Ayala agreed to settle a case he brought against a Minnesota company, Aerotek, and then he changed his mind.
(At least before the so-called “settlement” in the Ayala case, Mr. Ayala’s lawsuit was similar to the unfortunate Mr. Chandramouli Vaidyanathan’s protracted lawsuit, covered at some length in previous Minnesota Litigator posts (or Mr. Neal Hanson’s). That is, in these cases, workers alleged that they were recruited for jobs requiring them to move but the promised jobs evaporated on arrival. Mr. Vaidyanathan was allegedly lured from Texas, Mr. Hanson was promised a move from Wichita, Kansas, and Mr. Ayala, from Afghanistan (!)).
Unsurprisingly, U.S. District Court Judge Michael J. Davis (D. Minn.) held Mr. Ayala to the settlement agreement that he gave every indication he agreed to. As mentioned in earlier Minnesota Litigator posts (here and here, for example), for obvious reasons, courts are pretty strict about enforcing settlement agreements.