Naveed et al v. City of San Jose

Filing 48

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING 47 Second Stipulated Dismissal. Signed by Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on 5/25/2017. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/25/2017)

5

Steven M. Berki, SBN 245426
BUSTAMANTE & GAGLIASSO, P.C.
River Park Towers
333 W. San Carlos St., 8th Floor,
San Jose, California 95110
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

6

Attorney for Plaintiffs

1
2
3
4

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

RICHARD DOYLE, City Attorney (SBN 88625)
NORA FRIMANN, Assistant City Attorney (SBN 93249)
ARDELL JOHNSON, Chief Deputy City Attorney (SBN 95340)
ALAN R. LIPTON, Senior Deputy City Attorney (SBN 95177)
Office of the City Attorney
200 East Santa Clara Street, 16th Floor
San José, California 95113-1905
Telephone Number: [phone]
Facsimile Number: [phone]
E-Mail Address: [e-mail]
Attorneys for DEFENDANTS,
CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al.

15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18
19
20
21

MOHAMMAD BADAR NAVEED, et. al.,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.

Defendant(s).

23

25
26
27
28

SECOND STIPULATED DISMISSAL
PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)

CITY OF SAN JOSE, et. al.,

22

24

Case No. 5:15-cv-05298 EDL

Complaint Filed: July 10, 2015

// 

// 

// 

Page 1
SECOND STIPULATED DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)

1

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the plaintiffs Mohammad Badar Naveed and

2

Humza Ahmad, and all remaining defendants, including defendants City of San Jose, Officer

3

Wallace, Officer Tran, and Officer Ornelas (“City Defendants”) that in response to the settlement

4

obtained and after having met and conferred, Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each cause of action, against

5

each remaining defendant, should be dismissed with prejudice against all remaining defendants,

6

including City Defendants named above.

7

The parties thereby agree as follows:

8

Plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed with prejudice against all defendants, including City

9
10

Defendants. This Stipulation and Dismissal is brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(A).

11
12

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: May 24, 2017

BUSTAMANTE & GAGLIASSO, APC

13
__________________/S/____________________
STEVEN M. BERKI, co-counsel of record for
Plaintiffs

14
15
16
17

Dated: May 24, 2017

RICHARD DOYLE, City Attorney

18
19

/s/ Alan Lipton, Esq.
Alan R. Lipton
Senior Deputy City Attorney
Attorneys for Defendants

20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 2
SECOND STIPULATED DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)

1
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER

3
4
5
6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the stipulation is GRANTED.
Plaintiffs’ Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.
SO ORDERED,

7
8
9
10

Dated:_______________
May 25, 2017

__________________________
Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte
United States Magistrate Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 3
SECOND STIPULATED DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)