Spy Phone Labs LLC. v. Google Inc. et al

Filing 89

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL re 88 Joint MOTION to Dismiss ,Stipulation for Dismissal and Proposed Order filed by Spy Phone Labs LLC., Google Inc., ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 5/8/17. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

DURIE TANGRI LLP
MICHAEL H. PAGE (SBN 154913)
[e-mail]
JOSEPH C. GRATZ (SBN 240676)
[e-mail]
217 Leidesdorff Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
415-236-6300
Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant
GOOGLE INC.

8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11

SPY PHONE LABS LLC,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
GOOGLE INC. ANDREI CIUCA, d/b/a CAD
DESIGN, and JOHN DOES 1-49,

20
21

Judge: Honorable Kandis A. Westmore

GOOGLE INC.,
Counterclaimant,

18
19

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
DISMISSING ALL CLAIMS AND
COUNTERCLAIMS

Defendants.

16
17

OAKLAND DIVISION
Case No. 4:15-cv-03756-KAW

v.
SPY PHONE LABS LLC,
Counter-Defendant.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING ALL CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS
CASE NO. 4:15-CV-03756-KAW

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by plaintiff Spy Phone Labs LLC (“Spy Phone”) and Defendant
Google Inc. (“Google”) through their counsel that all claims by Spy Phone against Google and all
counterclaims by Google against Spy Phone be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice in their entirety
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), with all parties are to bear their own costs.
All claims stated by Spy Phone against Andrei Ciuca and Does 1-49, none of whom have either been
served or have appeared, are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(A)(i).

8
9

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: May 9, 2017

DURIE TANGRI LLP

10
11

By:

/s/Michael H. Page
MICHAEL H. PAGE
JOSEPH C. GRATZ

12
13

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant
GOOGLE INC.

14
15

Dated: May 9, 2017

16

GREENBERG FREEMAN LLP
RIMON P.C.
By:
/s/Neil A. Smith
NEIL A. SMITH

17
18

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant
SPY PHONE LABS LLC

19

FILER’S ATTESTATION

20
21
22

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3), regarding signatures, I, Neil A. Smith, attest that concurrence in
the filing of this document has been obtained.
Dated: May 9, 2017

/s/ Neil A. Smith
NEIL A.SMITH

23
24
[PROPOSED] ORDER

25
26
27

SO ORDERED.
5/8/17
Dated: __________________
HONORABLE KANDIS A. WESTMORE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING ALL CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS
CASE NO. 4:15-CV-03756-KAW