Williams v. Martel

Filing 64

STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 5/9/13. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/9/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California DANIELLE F. O'BANNON Supervising Deputy Attorney General SAHAR NAYERI Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 275246 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: (415) 703-5337 Facsimile: (415) 703-1234 Attorneys for Defendants T. Boerum, M. Martel, J. Robertson, B. Haub, W. Rodriguez, P. Farnsworth, C. MacDonald, R. Briggs, J. Puu, E. Garcia, and D. Stokley 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 OAKLAND 12 13 Case No. C 11-5558 SBA (PR) JOSEPH WILLIAMS, STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY Plaintiff, DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE (Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)) 14 15 v. 16 17 M. MARTEL, et al., Defendants. 18 19 Plaintiff Joseph Williams and Defendants M. Martel, et al. have resolved this case in its 20 entirety. Therefore, the parties stipulate to a dismissal of this action with prejudice under Federal 21 Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 26 27 28 1 Stip. Voluntary Dismissal [Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)] (C 11-5558 SBA (PR)) 1 Each party shall bear its own litigation costs and attorney’s fees. 2 It is so stipulated. 3 4 Dated: 5/07/13 /s/ Joseph Williams Plaintiff Dated: 5/08/13 /s/ Sahar Nayeri Sahar Nayeri Deputy Attorney General California Attorney General's Office Attorney for Defendants M. MARTEL, et al. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 In accordance with the parties' stipulation, this action is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 15 Dated: 5/9/13 The Honorable Saundra B. Armstrong 16 17 18 19 20 21 SF2012204901 22 20686464.doc 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Stip. Voluntary Dismissal [Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)] (C 11-5558 SBA (PR))

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?