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)
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?