Sharma et al v. Provident Funding Associates, L.P. et al

Filing 79

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas on February 4, 2013. (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2013)

Download PDF
Case1:09-cv-05968-NJV Document78 Filed01/28/13 Page1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Stephen C. Ruehmann, Esq. (167533) steve@ruehmannlawfirm.com Robin D. Shofner, Esq. (272552) robin@ruehmannlawfirm.com RUEHMANN LAW FIRM, P.C. 9580 Oak Avenue Parkway, Suite 15 Folsom, California 95630 Tel: (916) 988-8001 Fax: (916) 988-8002 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, ANILECH SHARMA and PARMA SHARMA 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ANILECH SHARMA AND PARMA SHARMA, ) Case No.: CV09-05968 ) ) REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL Plaintiffs, ) AND [PROPOSED] ORDER vs. ) ) PROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, ) L.P., a California limited partnership; ) PREFERRED MORTGAGE; ) MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC ) REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., a ) Delaware corporation; MAX DEFAULT ) SERVICES CORPORATION, a California ) corporation and DOES 1-100, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) ) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to FRCP 41(a), Plaintiffs ANILECH 23 SHARMA AND PARMA SHARMA, voluntarily dismiss the above-captioned action with 24 prejudice. 25 Dated: January 28, 2013 REUHMANN LAW FIRM, P.C. 26 27 28 __/s/ Robin D. Shofner______________ Robin D. Shofner Attorney for Plaintiffs ANILECH SHARMA AND PARMA SHARMA 1 REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case1:09-cv-05968-NJV Document78 Filed01/28/13 Page2 of 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL DISTR IT IS SO ORDERED. S 6 RT 8 D RDERE S SO O IT IUnited States District Magistrate Judge andor Judge N NO 7 __________________________________ ER 10 J. Vadas A H 9 R NIA 5 Dated: UNIT ED 4 ICT C RT U O 3 ES AT T FO 2 LI 1 N F D IS T IC T O R C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

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?