Huizar v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 63

STIPULATION and ORDER of Dismissal with prejudice as to Defendant, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/6/2017. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4

C.O. LAW, APC
Clark Ovruchesky, Esq. (SBN: 301844)
[e-mail]
750 B. Street, Suite 3300
San Diego, California 92101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

5
6
7

Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Sandra Huizar
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

SANDRA HUIZAR,
Plaintiff,
vs.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., BANK OF
AMERICA, N.A., COMENITY BANK/ LANE
BRYANT, EXPERIAN INFORMATION
SOLUTIONS, INC., TRANS UNION LLC, and
EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC;
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:17-cv-00322-LJOEPG
STIPULATION AND ORDER OF
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
AS TO DEFENDANT WELLS
FARGO BANK, N.A.
ORDER TO CLOSE CASE

16
17

Plaintiff Sandra Huizar (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

18

(“WFBNA”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their counsel of record, hereby

19

stipulate and agree that Plaintiff’s claims against WFBNA should be dismissed, with prejudice,

20
21

with Plaintiff and WFBNA to each bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees. The Parties agree
that this Court can proceed to dismiss Defendant WFBNA, with prejudice, from this action.
Respectfully submitted,

22
23

Date: December 5, 2017

24
25
26
27
28

Date: December 5, 2017

/s/
Clark Ovruchesky, Esq.
C.O. LAW, APC
750 B. Street, Suite 3300
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Counsel for Sandra Huizar
/s/

Page 1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5

Alisa A. Givental
Severson & Werson, APC
One Embarcadero Center, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Counsel for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 2 of 3

1

ORDER

2

On December 5, 2017, Plaintiffs and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. filed a stipulation voluntary

3

dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (ECF No. 56). Thus,

4

the claims against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. have been terminated, see Fed. R. Civ. P.

5

41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997), and dismissed

6

with prejudice. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Even if the defendant

7

has filed a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff may terminate his action voluntarily by filing a notice

8

of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1).”). Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, Plaintiff Sandra Huizar

9

and Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. shall each bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees.
By separate stipulations filed previously in this case, all claims against all defendants

10
11

have been dismissed. (ECF Nos. 41, 44, 57, 61). Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to close this

12

case.

13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 6, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 3 of 3