Allied Lomar, Inc. v. Napa Valley Limoncello

Filing 16

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 10/09/14. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/9/2014)

Case4:14-cv-03199-DMR Document14 Filed10/07/14 Page1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5

Robert P. Andris (SBN 130290)
Michael D. Kanach (SBN 271215)
GORDON & REES LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ALLIED LOMAR, INC.

6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

9
10

ALLIED LOMAR, INC.,

Gordon & Rees LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111

11
12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
vs.
NAPA VALLEY LIMONCELLO
COMPANY DBA NAPA VALLEY
DISTILLERY; et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 4:14-cv-03199-DMR
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF ALLIED LOMAR, INC.’S
NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
OF COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP
41(a)(1)(A)(i)
Action filed: July 15, 2014

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT

Case No. 4:14-cv-03199-DMR

Case4:14-cv-03199-DMR Document14 Filed10/07/14 Page2 of 2

1

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSELS OF RECORD:

2

On September 17, 2104, Plaintiff ALLIED LOMAR, INC. (“Plaintiff”) filed a notice of

3

settlement with Defendant NAPA VALLEY LIMONCELLO COMPANY dba NAPA VALLEY

4

DISTILLERY (“Defendant”), and Plaintiff requested an Order Permitting Voluntary Dismissal

5

of Complaint With Prejudice. (Docket No. 13.)

6

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff

7

requested the dismissal without prejudice of all claims in the above-captioned action, in their

8

entirety, against Defendant and all unnamed DOE Defendants. Defendant has not filed an

9

answer to the complaint or a motion for summary judgment in the above-captioned action.
The Parties agreed that their Settlement Agreement will be governed by, and shall be

11
Gordon & Rees LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111

10

construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California or where pre-empted, by the

12

appropriate body of federal law, and the United States District Court of the Northern District of

13

California shall retain exclusive jurisdiction to interpret and enforce the settlement agreement.

14

Each party is to bear its own costs and fees.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18
19

DATED:

October 9, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Honorable Donna M. Ryu

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ALOMAR/1099111/20993573v.1

2

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT

Case No. 4:14-cv-03199-DMR