Speedzone Motorsports LLC v. RS Type Product Inc et al
Filing
26
ORDER APPROVING JOINT REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE PERFORMANCE OF CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Joint Request 25 , the court rules as follows: The complaint and counter-claims are dismiss ed without prejudice. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the conditional settlement agreement pursuant to its terms. The Court orders the parties to return to court on 1/26/2015 11:00 AM before Judge Christina A. Snyder, to follow up on t he status of the settlement. Should all payments be made according to the terms of the settlement agreement, counsel for plaintiff, Speedzone Motorsports, LLC., shall inform the Court so that they above status conference is taken off calendar and the matter dismissed with prejudice. ( Case Terminated. Made JS-6. ) (gk)
1
JS-6
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
SPEEDZONE MOTORSPORTS, LLC, a
California limited liability company,
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Plaintiff,
vs.
RS TYPE PRODUCT, INC. d.b.a. RS
TYPE, a California corporation;
CHARLES M. TSAI, an individual;
MAGGIE CHEN FEI HSU, an individual;
WILLIAM CHUNG, an individual;
AUTOTEC IMPORT, INC. d.b.a. GENKI
TUNING d.b.a. D5 CONCEPTS, a
California corporation; AUTOTEC
INDUSTRIAL CORP., a California
corporation; and DOES 1 to 30,
Case No.:CV13-05079-CAS(PLAx)
ORDER
APPROVING JOINT REQUEST
FOR DISMISSAL AND
RETENTION OF
JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE
PERFORMANCE OF
CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT
Defendants.
24
25
26
27
28
- 1 –
[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING JOINT REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT AND COUNTERCLAIMS AND RETENTION OF
JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT
1
2
RS TYPE PRODUCT, dba RS TYPE, a
California Corporation; CHARLES M.
TSAI, an individual,
3
Counter-Claimant,
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
vs.
SPEEDZONE MOTORSPORTS, LLC, a
California limited liability company
Counter-Defendant
DENNIS FRANCISCO, an individual and
ROES 1 through 20, inclusive,
Third Party Defendants
12
13
14
15
This matter, having come before the Court on the Stipulation of plaintiff and
counter-defendant SPEEDZONE MOTORSPORTS, LLC. (“SPEEDZONE”), third
16
party defendant DENNIS FRANCISCO (“FRANCISCO”), defendant and Counter-
17
claimant RS TYPE PRODUCT, INC. (“RS TYPE”), defendant and Counter-
18
claimant CHARLES M. TSAI (“TSAI”), defendant MAGGIE CHEN FEI HSU
19
20
(“HSU”), defendant WILLIAM CHUNG (“CHUNG”), defendant AUTOTEC
21
IMPORT, INC. (“AUTOTEC IMPORT”), and defendant AUTOTEC
22
INDUSTRIAL CORP. (“AUTOTEC INDUSTRIAL”) to dismiss the action and for
23
24
25
26
the Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce performance of a conditional settlement
agreement, the court rules as follows:
1.
The complaint and counter-claims are dismissed without prejudice.
27
28
- 2 –
[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING JOINT REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT AND COUNTERCLAIMS AND RETENTION OF
JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2.
The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the conditional
settlement agreement pursuant to its terms.
3.
The Court orders the parties to return to court at 11:00 a.m. on
January 26, 2015 to follow up on the status of the settlement.
4.
Should all payments be made according to the terms of the settlement
agreement, counsel for plaintiff, Speedzone Motorsports, LLC., shall inform the
Court so that they above status conference is taken off calendar and the matter
dismissed with prejudice.
11
12
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated:_August 29, 2014
____________________________
Hon. Christina A. Snyder
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 3 –
[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING JOINT REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT AND COUNTERCLAIMS AND RETENTION OF
JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT
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?