Shaw v. Fou et al

Filing 20

STIPULATION for Dismissal and ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 03/04/15. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 CECIL SHAW, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 15 vs. HANG YAN FOU, et al., Defendants. 16 ) No. 1:14-cv-01710-SKO ) ) STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF ) ACTION; ORDER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 17 18 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Cecil Shaw and Defendants 19 Hang Yan Fou, Ratha Minn, Rosa Maria Vasquez dba La Mejor Mexican Food, and Sukha 20 Singh dba JCM Mini Mart #2, the parties to this action, by and through their respective counsel, 21 that pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the above-captioned action be 22 dismissed with prejudice in its entirety. Each party is to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 23 24 Date: March 3, 2015 MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C. 25 26 27 28 /s/ Tanya E. Moore Tanya E. Moore Attorneys for Plaintiff Cecil Shaw STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF ACTION; ORDER Page 1 1 Date: March 3, 2015 WILLIAMS, BRODERSEN & PRITCHETT LLP 2 6 /s/ Steven R. Williams Steven R. Williams Attorneys for Defendants Hang Yan Fou, Ratha Minn, Rosa Maria Vasquez dba La Mejor Mexican Food, and Sukha Singh dba JCM Mini Mart #2 7 ORDER 3 4 5 8 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, 9 after service of an answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties 10 who have appeared, although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. See Eitel v. 11 McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986). 12 Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in 13 open court, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Caselaw concerning 14 stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of 15 dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval. Commercial Space 16 Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999). 17 Because the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice 18 under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) signed by all parties who have made an appearance, this case has 19 terminated. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Accordingly IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 20 Clerk of the Court is to administratively close this case. 21 22 23 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 4, 2015 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF ACTION; 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?