Morales v. Chung et al

Filing 11

ORDER DISMISSING CASE signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/23/2012. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 Tanya E. Moore, SBN 206683 K. Randolph Moore, SBN 106933 MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C. 332 North Second Street San Jose, California 95112 Telephone (408) 298-2000 Facsimile (408) 298-6046 Email: Tanya@moorelawfirm.com 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff John Morales 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 20 ) No. 1:12-CV-01335-AWI-GSA ) Plaintiff, ) NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL ) OF ACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER ) vs. ) YOUNG BAE CHUNG and SANDY OK ) CHUNG, TRUSTEES OF THE YOUNG BAE ) ) CHUNG AND SANDY OK CHUNG ) REVOCABLE TRUST DATED 9/21/2006; ) SAK KAUFMAN dba PHO #76 ) ) RESTAURANT & BAKERY aka PHO 76 ) RESTAURANT & BAKERY, ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) 21 WHEREAS, no Defendant has filed an answer or motion for summary judgment; 22 WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants have settled the matter in its entirety amongst 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 23 JOHN MORALES, themselves; 24 WHEREAS, no counterclaim has been filed; 25 Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that this action be dismissed with prejudice 26 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 27 /// 28 /// Morales v. Young Bae Chung, et al. Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Action; [Proposed] Order Page 1 1 Date: October 23, 2012 MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C. 2 3 /s/Tanya E. Moore Tanya E. Moore Attorneys for Plaintiff John Morales 4 5 6 ORDER 7 8 Good cause appearing, 9 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action be dismissed with prejudice in its entirety 10 pursuant to Rule 41(a), and the clerk shall CLOSE this case. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 Dated: October 23, 2012 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 DEAC_Signature-END: 18 ciem0h3i 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Morales v. Young Bae Chung, et al. Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Action; [Proposed] Order Page 2

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?