Yarum v. AlliedBarton Security Services, LP

Filing 66

ORDER RE Defendant's Summary Judgment Motion. Signed by Judge Koh on 3/7/2011. (lhklc4, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/7/2011)

Download PDF
Yarum v. AlliedBarton Security Services, LP Doc. 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MARY C. YARUM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ALLIEDBARTON SECURITY SERVICES LP, ) and DOES 1 through 100, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Case No.: 09-CV-05615-LHK ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION On February 4, 2011, Defendant AlliedBarton Security Services LP moved for summary judgment. Dkt. No. 60. A hearing on AlliedBarton's motion was set for March 24, 2011. Under Civil Local Rule 7-3, Plaintiff Mary Yarum had until March 3, 2011 to file either an opposition or a statement of nonopposition to AlliedBarton's motion. As of this Order, Yarum had not filed either an opposition or a statement of nonopposition. The Court notes, however, that the Certification of ADR Session, filed February 18, 2011, represents that the parties fully settled their dispute through mediation. Dkt. No. 65. /// /// /// /// /// 1 Case No.: 09-CV-05615-LHK ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 If the parties have settled their case, they shall file a stipulated notice of voluntary dismissal by March 10, 2011. Otherwise, the March 24, 2011 motion hearing will remain as set. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 7, 2011 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 2 Case No.: 09-CV-05615-LHK ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

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?