Damon Terrell v. California Commerce Club Inc et al

Filing 20

ORDER APPROVING Stipulation to Dismiss Case 18 by Judge A. Howard Matz, and good cause showing, hereby orders the following: Plaintiff's individual claims against Defendants shall be dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own fees and costs. (jp)

Download PDF
COASTAL PACIFIC LEGAL GROUP MARK A. GOLOVACH (SBN 220760) 2 markg@coastalpacificlegal.com 501 W. Broadway, Suite 800 3 San Diego, California 92101 4 Telephone: 619/400-4895 – Facsimile: 619/684-3601 1 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff 6 Damon Terrell 7 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 8 REBEKAH KAUFMAN (BAR NO. 213222) RKaufman@mofo.com 9 425 Market Street 10 San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415/268-7000 / Facsimile: 415/268-7522 11 12 Attorneys for Defendants 13 California Commerce Club, Inc. and Commerce Casino 14 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17 WESTERN DIVISION 18 19 DAMON TERRELL, Individually and 20 on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 21 Plaintiff, 22 23 vs. 24 CALIFORNIA COMMERCE CLUB, 25 INC., COMMERCE CASINO, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, 26 27 Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 2:11-cv-10285-AHM(MANx) ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS CASE 28 ORDER 1 The Court, having reviewed the Stipulation to Dismiss Case, by plaintiff 2 DAMON TERRELL (“Plaintiff”) and defendants CALIFORNIA COMMERCE 3 CLUB, INC. (“Commerce Club”) and COMMERCE CASINO (“Commerce 4 Casino”) (collectively, “Defendants”), filed July 17, 2012, and good cause 5 showing, hereby orders the following: 6 Plaintiff’s individual claims against Defendants shall be dismissed with 7 prejudice, with each party to bear its own fees and costs. 8 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 DATED: August 27, 2012 11 12 13 14 ____________________________ Honorable A. Howard Matz United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?