Bond v. Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.

Filing 68

FINAL JUDGMENT and DISMISSAL signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 4/30/2012. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 CRAIG ACKERMANN (Bar No. 229832) TATIANA HERNANDEZ (Bar No. 255322) 2 ACKERMANN & TILAJEF, P.C. 1180 S. Beverly Drive, Suite 610 3 Los Angeles, CA 90035 Telephone: (310) 277-0614 4 Facsimile: (310) 277-0635 5 MELISSA MEEKER HARNETT (Bar No. 164309) mharnett@wccelaw.com 6 JESSE B. LEVIN (Bar No. 268047) jlevin@wccelaw.com 7 WASSERMAN, COMDEN, CASSELMAN & ESENSTEN, L.L.P. 8 5567 Reseda Boulevard, Suite 330 Post Office Box 7033 9 Tarzana, California 91357-7033 Telephone: (818) 705-6800 • (323) 872-0995 10 Facsimile: (818) 996-8266 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff, LEE BOND and RICHARD JAMES BURKHART, 12 individually and others similarly situated 13 14 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 LEE BOND and RICHARD JAMES BURKHART, individually and others 20 similarly situated, CASE NO. 1:09-CV-01662-MJS 21 FINAL JUDGMENT AND DISMISSAL CLASS ACTION Plaintiffs, 22 vs. Crtrm.: 3 Judge: Hon. Michael J. Seng 23 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC., a 24 corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 25 Defendants. 26 27 28 986044.1 1 [Proposed] Final Judgment and Dismissal 1:09-CV-01662-MJS 1 1. The Final Approval Order was entered on July 15, 2011; 2 2. All payments required to be made under the Settlement Agreement and 3 4 the Final Approval Order have now been made; 3. 5 6 Accordingly, the Court hereby enters Final Judgment and dismisses the Complaint with prejudice, pursuant to the terms set forth in the Stipulation between 7 8 Named Plaintiffs and Defendant, and the Final Approval Order. 9 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: 14 15 April 30, 2012 /s/ Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END: 16 ci4d6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 986044.1 2 [Proposed] Final Judgment and Dismissal 1:09-CV-01662-MJS

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?