Gough v. Berry et al

Filing 33

ORDER that Pla's case against Dft Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc. and Carolyn Joy Berry is dismissed with prejudice; denying Dft Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc.'s 9 Motion to Dismiss as moot; denying Dft Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc.'s 22 Mo tion for Protective Order as moot; denying Pla's 16 Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating oral argument currently set for 05/04/09, at 11:00 a.m. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED directing the Clerk's office to close the case. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 04/13/09. (NOTE: see attached pdf for full details) (ESL)

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

JAMES S. GOUGH, an unmarried man, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) CAROLYN JOY BERRY, an unmarried) woman; JOY BERRY ENTERPRISES,) ) INC., a Delaware corporation, ) ) Defendants. ) )

No. CV 08-1303-PHX-JAT ORDER

Pending before this Court is Defendant Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 9) and Motion for Protective Order (Doc. # 22), Plaintiff's Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery (Doc. # 16), Plaintiff's Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice of Carolyn Joy Berry (Doc. # 31), and Plaintiff's Notice of Dismissal with Prejudice of Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc. (Doc. # 32). Having reviewed Plaintiff's Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice of Carolyn Joy Berry, and Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court finds that dismissal as requested by Plaintiff is proper. Further, according to Plaintiff's Notice of Dismissal with Prejudice of Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc., and Defendant Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc. having not filed an answer or a motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), see Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493,1506 (9th Cir. 1995),

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

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's case against Defendant Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc. is dismissed with prejudice; that Plaintiff's case against Defendant Carolyn Joy Berry is dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Defendant Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 9) as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Defendant Joy Berry Enterprises, Inc.'s Motion for Protective Order (Doc. # 22) as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiff's Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery (Doc. # 16) as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating oral argument currently set for May 4, 2009, at 11:00 a.m. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED directing the Clerk's office to close the case. DATED this 13th day of April, 2009.

-2-