Gonzalez v. Rite Aid Corporation
Filing
66
ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 10/04/17 ORDERING that, pursuant to 65 Stipulation, this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, each side to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)
1
2
3
4
MATTHEW RIGHETTI (Cal. State Bar No. 121012)
JOHN GLUGOSKI (Cal. State Bar No. 191551)
MICHAEL RIGHETTI (Cal. State Bar No. 258541)
RIGHETTI GLUGOSKI, P.C.
456 Montgomery Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: (415) 983-0900
Facsimile: (415) 397-9005
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Chris Gonzalez
JEFFREY D. WOHL (Cal. State Bar No. 96838)
JUSTIN M. SCOTT (Cal. State Bar No. 302502)
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone:
(415) 856-7000
Facsimile:
(415) 856-7100
jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
justinscott@paulhastings.com
Attorneys for Defendant
Rite Aid Corporation
13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
17
CHRIS GONZALEZ, an individual,
18
Plaintiff,
No. 2:14-CV-01963-JAM-EFB
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITH
PREJUDICE
19
vs.
Judge:
Hon. John A. Mendez
Complaint Filed:
Trial Date:
October 25, 2013
October 23, 2017
20
21
RITE AID CORPORATION, and DOES 1
through 50, inclusive,
22
Defendants.
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER REGARDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION
U.S.D.C. E.D. CAL.NO. 2:14-CV-01963-JAM-EFB
LEGAL_US_W # 91443020.1
1
Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor,
2
IT IS ORDERED that this action be and hereby is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, each side
3
4
to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees.
Dated: 10/4/2017
/s/ John A. Mendez____________
5
6
Hon. John A. Mendez
United States District Court Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1LEGAL_US_W # 91443020.1
ORDER REGARDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION
U.S.D.C. E.D. CAL.NO. 2:14-CV-01963-JAM-EFB
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?