Pilby v. Hewlett-Packard Company

Filing 9

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 5/3/2013 DISMISSING CASE, in its entirety, with prejudice, pursuant to F.R.Cv.P. Rule 41(a)(1); ORDERING that each party bear their own fees and costs. CASE CLOSED. (Michel, G)

Download PDF
. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ROBERT P. HENK (147490) SHERI L. LEONARD (173544) HENKLEONARD A Professional Law Corporation 2260 Douglas Blvd., Suite 200 Roseville, CA 95661 Telephone: (916) 787-4544 Fax: (916) 787-4530 Email: henkleonard@aol.com Attorneys for Plaintiff JEFF PILBY Kathleen Cahill Slaught (168129) Michelle M. Scannell (267767) SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 560 Mission Street, Suite 3100 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 397-2823 Fax: (415) 397-8549 Email: kslaught@seyfarth.com mscannell@seyfarth.com Attorneys for Defendant, HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 17 18 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 19 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 20 21 JEFF PILBY, 22 vs. 13 CV 00603 MCE EFB Plaintiff, 23 CASE NO.: 24 25 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR DISMISSAL HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY and DOES 1 through 5, inclusive, 26 Defendant. 27 28 29 /// 1 . 1 2 3 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Plaintiff and Defendant, through their designated counsel of record, that this case be dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1), each party to bear their own fees and costs. 4 5 6 7 Dated: May 1, 2013 HENK LEONARD 8 A Professional Law Corporation 9 /s/SHERI L. LEONARD SHERI L. LEONARD Attorney for Plaintiff JEFF PILBY 10 11 12 13 14 Dated: May 1, 2013 15 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP /s/KATHLEEN CAHILL SLAUGHT( as auth.on5/1/13) KATHLEEN CAHILL SLAUGHT MICHELLE M. SCANNELL Attorney for Defendant HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 16 17 18 19 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATE: May 3, 2013 22 23 24 25 ___________________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 26 27 28 29 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?