Yates v. Buckeye Roadhouse Restaurant et al
Filing
47
ORDER REGARDING STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 7, 2011. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/7/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
CRAIG YATES,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
v.
BUCKEYE ROADHOUSE RESTAURANT,
BUCKEYE ROADHOUSE, INC., and
RUDOLPH H. BUSH,
ORDER REGARDING
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
Defendants.
/
15
16
No. C 10-05283 WHA
The parties have settled and have stipulated to dismiss this action with prejudice. The
17
parties specifically state, however, that the settlement agreement is contingent upon the
18
undersigned (or Magistrate Judge Laporte or another magistrate judge) retaining jurisdiction to
19
enforce the settlement agreement, with no date by which such proposed jurisdiction would
20
terminate. This order will not approve of such provision, and would only approve retaining
21
jurisdiction for up to ninety days to enforce the settlement agreement. As the dismissal appears to
22
be contingent upon the jurisdiction provision, the assigned judge cannot instruct the Clerk to close
23
the case pursuant to a FRCP 41(a)(1) dismissal signed by both sides, as he otherwise would. This
24
case shall remain open, and the parties may either file a renewed dismissal (without the offending
25
provision) or continue to litigate this case.
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 7, 2011.
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?