Campbell v. Rite Aid Corporation

Filing 34

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/1/17, ORDERING that this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, each side to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
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 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff Mike Campbell JEFFREY D. WOHL (Cal. State Bar No. 096838) JUSTIN M. SCOTT (Cal. State Bar No. 302502) W. TUCKER PAGE (Cal. State Bar No. 306728) 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 tuckerpage@paulhastings.com Attorneys for Defendant Rite Aid Corporation 14 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17 18 MIKE CAMPBELL, 19 20 21 Plaintiff, No. 2:15-cv-02396-JAM-EFB STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE vs. RITE AID CORPORATION, and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive, Judge: Complaint Filed: Hon. John A. Mendez May 20, 2015 22 Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal., No. 2:15-cv-02396-JAM-EFB LEGAL_US_W # 92084640.1 1 Plaintiff Mike Campbell and defendant Rite Aid Corporation, acting through their respective 2 counsel of record, hereby stipulate that this action may be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 3 Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each side to bear its own costs and attorneys’ 4 fees. 5 Dated: November 30, 2017. 6 7 8 By: /s/ Michael Righetti Michael Righetti Attorneys for Plaintiff Mike Campbell 9 10 11 MATTHEW RIGHETTI JOHN GLUGOSKI MICHAEL RIGHETTI RIGHETTI·GLUGOSKI, P.C. Dated: November 30, 2017. 12 13 14 JEFFREY D. WOHL JUSTIN M. SCOTT W. TUCKER PAGE PAUL HASTINGS LLP By: /s/ Justin M. Scott Justin M. Scott Attorneys for Defendant Rite Aid Corporation 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal., No. 2:15-cv-02396-JAM-EFB LEGAL_US_W # 92084640.1 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 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff Mike Campbell JEFFREY D. WOHL (Cal. State Bar No. 096838) JUSTIN M. SCOTT (Cal. State Bar No. 302502) W. TUCKER PAGE (Cal. State Bar No. 306728) 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 tuckerpage@paulhastings.com Attorneys for Defendant Rite Aid Corporation 14 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17 18 MIKE CAMPBELL, 19 20 21 Plaintiff, No. 2:15-cv-02396-JAM-EFB ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITH PREJUDICE vs. RITE AID CORPORATION, and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive, Judge: Complaint Filed: Hon. John A. Mendez May 20, 2015 22 Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER REGARDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal., No. 2:15-cv-02396-JAM-EFB LEGAL_US_W # 92084652.1 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 to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. 4 5 Dated: December 1, 2017 6 /s/ JOHN A. MENDEZ Hon. John A. Mendez United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER REGARDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal., No. 2:15-cv-02396-JAM-EFB LEGAL_US_W # 92084652.1

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?