OPHCA, LLC et al v. City of Berkeley

Filing 71

STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE PURSUANT TO RULE 41. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 12/14/2017. (lsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/14/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6

NAVI SINGH DHILLON (CA SBN 279537)
E-mail: [e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.268.7522
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
OPHCA, LLC, CLIFFORD ORLOFF,
and OLGA ORLOFF

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

OPHCA, LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company, et al.,

13
Plaintiffs,

Case No. 3:16-cv-03046-CRB
RULE 41 STIPULATION TO
DISMISS ENTIRE ACTION: ORDER

14
vs.

Judge:
Hon. Charles R. Breyer
Courtroom: 6 (17th Floor)

15
CITY OF BERKELEY,
16
Defendant.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:16-cv-03046-CRB

RULE 41 STIPULATION TO DISMISS

1
2
3

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, the undersigned parties hereby stipulate as
follows:
WHEREAS, in February 2017, Plaintiffs filed a related action in the California Superior

4

Court, County of Alameda: OPHCA, LLC vs. City of Berkeley, Case No. RG17850595 (State

5

Court Action);

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

WHEREAS, on November 29, 2017, the California Superior Court entered judgment in
the State Court Action and that judgment resolves the claims in this action;
WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to dismiss this action in light of the resolution
reached in the State Court Action;
WHEREAS, no party shall be entitled to recover fees or costs based on the dismissal of
this action;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties ask that the Court dismiss Plaintiffs’
complaint with prejudice.

14
15

Respectfully submitted,

16
17

Dated: December 12, 2017

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

18
By:

19
20

/s/ Navi Singh Dhillon
NAVI SINGH DHILLON
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
OPHCA, LLC, CLIFFORD ORLOFF,
and OLGA ORLOFF

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:16-cv-03046-CRB

RULE 41 STIPULATION TO DISMISS

1

1

Dated: December 12, 2017

2
By:

/s/ Farimah Brown
Farimah Brown
ISTRCITY ATTORNEY
ICT
ES D
T
C

. Breyer

RT

H

ER

FO

harles R
Judge C

NO

7

Attorney for Defendant
CITY OF BERKELEY

ERED

O ORD

IT IS S

LI

Date: December 14, 2017

TA

A

6

UNIT
ED

5

RT
U
O

S

4

R NIA

3

N

D

OF

C

8

IS T RIC T
ECF ATTESTATION

9

I, Navi Singh Dhillon, hereby attest that Farimah Brown concurs in this filing. This

10

attestation is made pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:16-cv-03046-CRB
RULE 41 STIPULATION TO DISMISS

2