Rushdan v. Gonzales et al

Filing 25

ORDER DIRECTING Clerk of Court to Close Action Pursuant to Stipulation for Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 3/24/16. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672 Attorney General of California CHRISTOPHER J. BECKER, State Bar No. 230529 Supervising Deputy Attorney General DIANA ESQUIVEL, State Bar No. 202954 Deputy Attorney General 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 445-4928 Facsimile: (916) 324-5205 E-mail: Diana.Esquivel@doj.ca.gov 7 Attorneys for Defendants 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 FRESNO DIVISION 12 13 SALADIN RUSHDAN, No. 1:14-cv-01807 DLB 14 15 v. 16 17 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE ACTION PURSUANT TO STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE J. GONZALES, et al., 18 (Document 24) Defendants. 19 20 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Plaintiff Saladin Rushdan (aka 21 22 23 24 Robert S. Woods), by and through specially appearing pro bono counsel, Douglas Thorn, and Defendants, by and through their counsel of record, stipulate to the voluntary dismissal of this action with prejudice. Each party is to bear his own costs, attorney’s fees, and expenses. There is no prevailing 25 26 27 28 party in this action. /// /// 1 Stipulation for Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice and Order (1:14-cv-01807 DLB) 1 2 Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to close this case.1 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: /s/ Dennis March 24, 2016 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 L. Beck The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge. 2 Stipulation for Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice and Order (1:14-cv-01807 DLB)

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?