Carl L. Jimena v. Clive Standish, et al

Filing 320

JUDGMENT dated *7/20/2011* signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 7/20/2011. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

GEORGE M. GARVEY (State Bar No. 089543)
JACOB S. KREILKAMP (State Bar No. 248210)
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
355 South Grand Avenue
Thirty-Fifth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
UBS AG and UBS FINANCIAL
SERVICES INC.

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

FRESNO DIVISION

12
13
14

CARL L. JIMENA,
Plaintiff,

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

CASE NO. 07-CV-00367-OWW-SKO
JUDGMENT

vs.
UBS AG BANK, INC.,
SWITZERLAND
HEADQUARTERS; UBS AG
BANK, INC., MANHATTAN,
NEW YORK BRANCH; UBS
FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.,
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
BRANCH; AND UBS FINANCIAL
SERVICES, INC., WEEHAWKEN,
NEW JERSEY BRANCH; CLIVE
STANDISH,

23

Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28
07-CV-00367-OWW-SKO
JUDGMENT
14404846.1

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

The true defendants in this case are UBS AG, UBS Financial Services

2

Inc., and Clive Standish (as the Court noted in its June 8, 2007 Order Denying

3

Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, the

4

branch locations listed on the caption are not separate jural entities that may be

5

sued). On June 8, 2007, the Court granted Defendant UBS Financial Services

6

Inc.’s (“UBS FS”) motion to dismiss all plaintiff’s claims against it [Docket No.

7

14]. On October 13, 2009, the Court granted in part plaintiff’s motion for leave to

8

file a Third Amended Complaint, but ordered stricken all allegations against UBS

9

Financial Services Inc. [Docket No. 159]. On July 8, 2011, the Court granted

10

summary judgment to UBS AG as to all claims against it [Docket No. 318].

11

Defendant Clive Standish has never appeared, and no proof of service of the

12

summons and complaint on Mr. Standish has been entered on the docket in the

13

more than four years this case has been pending; and the Court’s ruling on

14

summary judgment confirms that even if Mr. Standish had been served, summary

15

judgment would have been granted as to all claims against him as well.

16

The Court expressly finds that there is no just reason for delay of the

17

entry of judgment on all of plaintiff’s remaining claims against all defendants, and

18

expressly directs that judgment be entered against plaintiff as follows:

19

It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiff takes nothing from

20

defendants, that the action be dismissed in its entirety, and that UBS AG and UBS

21

FS may submit a cost bill in accordance with the requirements of law.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25
26

Dated: July 20, 2011

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER
OLIVER W. WANGER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
1

07-CV-00367-OWW-SKO
JUDGMENT
14404846.1

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com