Godhigh v. Sears Holding Corporation

Filing 22

ORDER DISMISSING CASE wiht Prejudice, each side to bear their own costs and fees. Signed by Judge Illston on 12/14/09. (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2009)

Download PDF
Case3:09-cv-01822-SI Document21 Filed12/07/09 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HOFFMAN EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS HOFFMAN EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS, LLP Michael Hoffman SBN 154481 Alec Segarich SBN 260189 100 Pine Street, Suite. 1550 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 362-1111 Facsimile: (415) 362-1112 mhoffman@employment-lawyers.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs BRYAN CAVE LLP Julie E. Patterson, California Bar No. 167326 jepatterson@bryancave.com Jesse E.M. Randolph, California Bar No. 221060 jesse.randolph@bryancave.com Nikol M. Kim, California Bar No. 260866 nikol.kim@bryancave.com 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500 Irvine, CA 92612-4414 Telephone: (949) 223-7000 Facsimile: (949) 223-7100 Attorneys for Defendants 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 100 Pine Street, Suite 1550 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 362-1111 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EARL GODHIGH, ) CASE NO: 3:09-CV-01822 SI ) ) Plaintiff STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT ) vs. WITH PREJUDICE ) ) [PROPOSED] ORDER ) SEARS HOLDING CORPORATION; a ) corporation, SEARS HOME ) IMPROVEMENT PRODUCTS, INC.; a ) corporation, SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO., ) ) a corporation, ) ) Defendants ) ____________________________________) ) ) ) ) ) ______________________________________________________________________________ STIPULATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT [PROPOSED] ORDER 3:09-cv-01822 SI Case3:09-cv-01822-SI Document21 Filed12/07/09 Page2 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HOFFMAN EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS Plaintiff EARL GODHIGH, and Defendant SEARS HOME IMPROVEMENT PRODUCTS, INC. ("SHIP") hereby jointly stipulate to Dismissal of the entire Action with prejudice pursuant to rule 41(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each side to bear their own costs and fees. DATED: December 7, 2009 HOFFMAN EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS, LLP ___________/S/__________________________ Michael Hoffman Attorney for Plaintiffs Earl Godhigh et al. BRYAN CAVE LLP /S/ ________________________________________ Julie Patterson Attorney for Defendant SHIP 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DATED: December 7, 2009 100 Pine Street, Suite 1550 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 362-1111 ______________________________________________________________________________ STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT [PROPOSED] ORDER 3:09-cv-01822 SI Case3:09-cv-01822-SI Document21 Filed12/07/09 Page3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HOFFMAN EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) ) SEARS HOLDING CORPORATION; a ) corporation, SEARS HOME ) IMPROVEMENT PRODUCTS, INC.; a ) corporation, SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO., ) ) a corporation, ) Defendants EARL GODHIGH, an individual, ____________________________________ CASE NO: 3:09-cv-01822 SI [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 100 Pine Street, Suite 1550 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 362-1111 Based upon the Stipulation of the parties, and for good cause, Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice, each side to bear their own costs and fees. __________________________________________ Judge Susan Illston UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE ______________________________________________________________________________ STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT [PROPOSED] ORDER 3:09-cv-01822 SI Case3:09-cv-01822-SI Document21 Filed12/07/09 Page4 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HOFFMAN EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1______________________________________________________________________________ STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT [PROPOSED] ORDER C 09-00765 SI 100 Pine Street, Suite 1550 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 362-1111

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?