Digital Sun v. The Toro Company

Filing 35

ORDER DISMISSING CASE Pursuant to Party Stipulation. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 4/20/2011. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 M INNEAPOLIS A TTORNEYS A T L AW R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P. 7 11 12 13 14 DANIEL J. BERGESON, Bar No. 105439 dbergeson@be-law.com MELINDA M. MORTON, Bar No. 209373 mmorton@be-law.com BERGESON, LLP 303 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 500 San Jose, CA 95110-2712 Telephone: (408) 291-6200 Facsimile: (408) 297-6000 MATTHEW L. WOODS, Bar No. 205278 (admitted pro hac vice) mlwoods@rkmc.com STACEY P. SLAUGHTER, Bar No. 0296971 (admitted pro hac vice) spslaughter@rkmc.com LARINA A. ALTON, Bar No. 0388332 (admitted pro hac vice) laalton@rkmc.com ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P. 800 LaSalle Avenue 2800 LaSalle Plaza Minneapolis, MN 55402-2015 Telephone: (612) 349-8500 Facsimile: (612) 339-4181 Attorneys for Defendant THE TORO COMPANY 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 SAN JOSE DIVISION 19 20 DIGITAL SUN, a California Corporation, Plaintiff, 21 22 v. 23 THE TORO COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, 24 Defendant. 25 Case No. CV 10-04567 LHK JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Complaint filed: October 8, 2010 Trial Date: None set 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL C10-04567 LHK 1 The parties hereto, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate 2 pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that this case be, and hereby 3 is, dismissed with prejudice and without costs to either party. The parties agree that 4 judgment may be entered accordingly. 5 Dated: April 19, 2011 6 BERGESON, LLP By: /s/ Melinda M. Morton 8 9 Of Counsel: Matthew L. Woods, Esq. William H. Manning, Esq. ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI LLP 10 M INNEAPOLIS A TTORNEYS A T L AW R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P. 7 11 12 Attorneys for Defendant THE TORO COMPANY 13 14 15 In accordance with General Order No. 45, Rule X, the above signatory attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatory below. 16 Dated: April 19, 2011 BLECHER & COLLINS, P.C. 17 By: /s/ Maxwell M. Blecher Maxwell M. Blecher Harold R. Collins, Jr. 18 19 Attorneys for Plaintiff DIGITAL SUN 20 21 // 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL -2- C10-04567 LHK 1 ORDER 2 3 Pursuant to the foregoing Stipulation and to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, all claims asserted by the 4 parties in this action are hereby dismissed with prejudice and on the merits, and with the parties 5 bearing their own costs, expenses, disbursements and attorneys’ fees. 6 LET THE JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. 8 BY THE COURT: 9 10 M INNEAPOLIS A TTORNEYS A T L AW R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P. 7 11 April 20, 2011 Dated: _________________ 12 By: ____________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The Honorable Lucy H. Koh 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL -3- C10-04567 LHK

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?