Ramirez et al v. Ganesha Restaurant et al

Filing 27

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL re 24 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER of Dismissal with Prejudice filed by Daren Heatherly, Irma Ramirez, Jenny Chang, George Chang, ***Civil Case Terminated.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 8/30/16. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/30/2016)

1
2
3
4
5

THOMAS E. FRANKOVICH (State Bar No. 074414)
THOMAS E. FRANKOVICH,
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
1832-A Capitol Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]

6
7

Attorney for Plaintiffs IRMA RAMIREZ
and DAREN HEATHERLY

8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13

IRMA RAMIREZ; and DAREN
HEATHERLY,

14
Plaintiffs,

15
16

v.

17

GANESHA RESTAURANT, et al.,

18

Defendants.

19

) Case No. 4:15-cv-02282-KAW
)
) STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND
) [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

20
The Parties, by and through their respective counsel, stipulate to the dismissal of this

21
22

action in its entirety with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.41(a)(2).

23

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this action through their

24

designated counsel that the above-captioned action may be, and hereby is, dismissed with

25

prejudice and that each side is to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees.

26

//

27

//

28

//
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

The parties further consent to and request that the Court retain jurisdiction over

1
2

enforcement of the Agreement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S.

3

375, 381-82 (1994) (empowering the district courts to retain jurisdiction over enforcement of

4

settlement agreements).
Respectfully Submitted,

5
6

Dated: August 16, 2016

THOMAS E. FRANKOVICH, APLC
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

7
8

By: /s/ Thomas E. Frankovich
Thomas E. Frankovich
Attorney for Plaintiffs

9
10
11

Dated: August 16, 2016

LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL HEATH

12
By: /s/ Michael Heath
Michael Heath
Attorney for Defendants GEORGE CHANG and
JENNY CHANG

13
14
15

[PROPOSED] ORDER

16
17
18
19

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P.41(a)(2) and that each side is to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing

20
21

the parties’ Settlement Agreement and General Release should such enforcement become

22

necessary.

23

Dated:

24
25

8/30

, 2016
Hon. Kandis A. Westmore
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER