Duran v. Hampton Creek

Filing 40

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 6/23/2016. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/23/2016)

Download PDF
1 RAOUL D. KENNEDY (CA SBN 40892) raoul.kennedy@skadden.com 2 JAMES P. SCHAEFER (CA SBN 250417) james.schaefer@skadden.com 3 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP 525 University Avenue, Suite 1400 4 Palo Alto, California 94301 Telephone: (650) 470-4500 5 Facsimile: (650) 470-4570 6 KENNETH A. PLEVAN (pro hac vice) kenneth.plevan@skadden.com 7 ANGELA COLT (CA SBN 286275) angela.colt@skadden.com 8 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP 4 Times Square 9 New York, New York 10036 Telephone: (212) 735-3000 10 Facsimile: (917) 777-3000 Attorneys for Defendant HAMPTON CREEK, INC. 11 Counsel continued on next page 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 15 ) DANIEL DURAN, individually, and ) Case No.: 3:15-cv-05497-LB on behalf of all others similarly situated, 16 ) ) JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY Plaintiff, 17 ) DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE ) PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF v. 18 ) CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) ) ORDER HAMPTON CREEK, INC., 19 ) ) Defendant. 20 ) Honorable Laurel Beeler ) Judge: 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) CASE NO. 3:15-cv-05497-LB 1 SCOTT EDWARD COLE (CA SBN 160744) scole@scalaw.com 2 MATTHEW R. BAINER (CA SBN 220972) mbainer@scalaw.com 3 SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC 1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor 4 Oakland, California, 94612 Telephone: (510) 891-9800 5 Facsimile: (510) 891-7030 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff DANIEL DURAN and the PUTATIVE CLASSES 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) CASE NO. 3:15-cv-05497-LB 1 TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 2 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Daniel Duran and Defendant 3 Hampton Creek, Inc., by and through their counsel of record, that, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), 4 that this action is dismissed with prejudice. 5 6 7 Dated: June 23, 2016 By: /s/ Kenneth A. Plevan Kenneth A. Plevan 8 RAOUL D. KENNEDY (CA SBN 40892) raoul.kennedy@skadden.com JAMES P. SCHAEFER (CA SBN 250417) james.schaefer@skadden.com SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP 525 University Avenue, Suite 1400 Palo Alto, California 94301 Telephone: (650) 470-4500 Facsimile: (650) 470-4570 9 10 11 12 13 KENNETH A. PLEVAN (pro hac vice) kenneth.plevan@skadden.com ANGELA COLT (CA SBN 286275) angela.colt@skadden.com SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP 4 Times Square New York, New York 10036 Telephone: (212) 735-3000 Facsimile: (917) 777-3000 14 15 16 17 18 Attorneys for Defendant HAMPTON CREEK, INC. 19 June 23, 2016 By: /s/ Matthew R. Bainer Matthew R. Bainer 21 23 24 S Dated: June 23, 2016 APPR NO 27 UNIT ED H ER eeler aurel B Attorneys for Plaintiff DANIEL DURAN and the PUTATIVE CLASSES LI RT 28 Judge L A 26 RT U O 25 SCOTT EDWARD COLE (CA SBN 160744) scole@scalaw.com MATTHEW R. BAINER (CA SBN 220972) mbainer@scalaw.com SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC 1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor STRIC I ES D TC Oakland, California, 94612 AT T Telephone: (510) 891-9800 Facsimile: (510) 891-7030 ED OV R NIA 22 FO 20 Dated: N F D IS T IC T O R C 1 JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) 930118-NYCSR06A - MSW CASE NO. 3:15-cv-05497-LB 1 2 ECF ATTESTATION Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filer of this document attests that concurrence in 3 the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories above. 4 /s/ Kenneth A. Plevan 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) CASE NO. 3:15-cv-05497-LB

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?