Mariscal v. AT&T Mobility Services, LLC

Filing 26

STIPULATION and ORDER DISMISSING CASE with Prejudice signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 02/15/2018. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

MICHAEL J. F. SMITH, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
MICHAEL J. F. SMITH (State Bar No. 109426)
JOHN L. MIGLIAZZO (State Bar No. 272066)
1391 West Shaw Avenue, Suite D
Fresno, California 93711
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STEPHANIE MARISCAL
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
SUSAN W. PANGBORN (State Bar No. 282533)
[e-mail]
KENDRA C. CHAPMAN (State Bar No. 294030)
[e-mail]
Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1900
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
AT&T MOBILITY SERVICES LLC

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

FRESNO DIVISION

17
18
19

STEPHANIE MARISCAL,
an individual,
Plaintiff,

20
21
22
23

v.
AT&T MOBILITY SERVICES, LLC,
a California Limited Liability Company;
and DOES 1-50, inclusive,

Case No. 1:17-cv-00688-DAD-EPG
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL
WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF
COURT TO CLOSE CASE

24
25

Defendants.

26
27
28

-1-

1

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties to this

2

action, by and through their respective counsel of record, that the entire action shall be

3

dismissed with prejudice as to all parties pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of

4

Civil Procedure. Each party is to bear its own costs and fees.

5
6

Dated: February 15, 2018

7

Respectfully submitted,
MICHAEL J. F. SMITH,
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

8
9

By: /s/ John L. Migliazzo [as authorized on 2/15/2018]
Michael J.F. Smith
John L. Migliazzo

10
11

Attorneys for Plaintiff
STEPHANIE MARISCAL

12
13
14
15

Dated: February 15, 2018

Respectfully submitted,
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP

16
17
18
19

By: /s/ Susan W. Pangborn
Susan W. Pangborn
Kendra C. Chapman
Attorneys for Defendant
AT&T MOBILITY SERVICES, LLC

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-1-

1
2

ORDER
On February 15, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation to dismiss this action with prejudice.

3

(ECF No. 25.) All parties have agreed to the dismissal. In light of the stipulation, the case has

4

ended, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir.

5

1997), and is dismissed with prejudice. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995).

6

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close this case.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated:

February 15, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-