Kent v. Hewlett-Packard Company

Filing 110

ORDER CLOSING CASE FILE. Signed by Judge Alsup on October 4, 2011. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/4/2011)

1
2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
6
7
8

MICHAEL A. KENT, BOYD
DAUGHERTY, DANIEL JOHANNING,
and JAKUB CMIRAL, individually and on
behalf of all those similarly situated,

ORDER CLOSING CASE FILE
Plaintiffs,

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

v.
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY,
a Delaware corporation,

12

Defendant.
/

13
14

No. C 09-05341 WHA

On September 20, 2011, Judge Fogel granted final approval of the settlement of this class

15

action, granted class counsel’s motion for attorney’s fees, and entered final judgment. A week

16

later, the case was reassigned to the undersigned judge (Dkt. No. 107). There are no pending

17

motions. The parties were ordered to show cause why the file should not be closed

18

(Dkt. No. 108). In a joint filing, the parties requested that the file remain open for two reasons:

19

(1) the appeals period has not yet run; and (2) the settlement program has not yet been

20

implemented. The parties, however, “do not anticipate” that an appeal will be filed or that

21

judicial assistance will be needed in implementing the settlement program (Dkt. No. 109). Good

22

cause has not been shown for keeping the file open. No unresolved issues are pending, and the

23

parties do not anticipate that additional issues will arise. Accordingly, the Clerk SHALL CLOSE

24

THE FILE.

If additional issues do arise in the future, the file may be re-opened as needed.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: October 4, 2011.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE