APEX Advance Holdings Limited v. Rivkin et al
Filing
30
ORDER GRANTING 29 Voluntary Dismissal without Prejudice filed by APEX Advance Holdings Limited. The Clerk shall close this file. ***ALL Deadlines terminated. Motions terminated: 17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Opposition to Motion to Dismiss filed by APEX Advance Holdings Limited, 7 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Efim Rivkin, Vladimir Rivkin, 28 Second MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Efim Rivkin, Vladimir Rivkin. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 7/14/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/14/2011)
S
ER
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff APEX
ADVANCE HOLDINGS LIMITED
vila
A
H
6
rd J . D a
R NIA
d wa
J u d ge E
FO
RT
5
NO
4
DERED
SO OR
IT IS
LI
3
UNIT
ED
2
JOHN DINAPOLI (SBN 84365)
STEVEN J. SIBLEY (SBN 152365)
DINAPOLI & SIBLEY
Ten Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1250
San Jose, CA 95113-2271
Telephone: (408) 999-0900
Facsimile:
(408) 999-0191
e-mail:
jfd@dslaw.net
RT
U
O
1
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
N
C
O F 7/14/2011
D IS T IC T
R
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
(San Jose Division)
10
11
APEX ADVANCE HOLDINGS LIMITED,
a corporation,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Case No.
CV-11-02051 EJD
NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Plaintiff,
v.
[Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)]
VLADIMIR RIVKIN, EFIM RIVKIN, IGOR
JONATAN SCHMIDT, REGINA
SCHMIDT, AND ALL PERSONS
UNKNOWN CLAIMING ANY LEGAL OR
EQUITABLE RIGHT, TITLE, ESTATE,
LIEN, OR INTEREST IN THE
PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE
COMPLAINT ADVERSE TO
PLAINTIFF’S TITLE, OR ANY CLOUD
ON PLAINTIFF’S TITLE,
20
21
22
Defendants.
TO DEFENDANTS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
23
24
25
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that plaintiff APEX ADVANCE HOLDINGS LIMITED,
a corporation, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a), and without stipulating to or accepting
26
defendants’ challenges to subject-matter jurisdiction in this case, hereby voluntarily dismiss this
27
case without prejudice.
The Clerk shall close this file.
28
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL
C:\Cases\Apex\Dismiss.Fed.wpd
Case No. 11-CV-02051-EJD
1
Dated:
July 13, 2011
DINAPOLI & SIBLEY
2
3
By:
/s/
4
JOHN DINAPOLI, Attorneys
for Plaintiff APEX ADVANCE
HOLDINGS LIMITED, a
corporation
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL
C:\Cases\Apex\Dismiss.Fed.wpd
2
Case No. 11-CV-02051-EJD
1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2
I am a citizen of the United States. My business address is the law offices DiNapoli &
Sibley, Ten Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1250, San Jose, California 95113-2271, and my phone
number is (408) 999-0900. I am employed in the County of Santa Clara where this service
occurred. I am over the age of 18 years, and not a party to the within cause. I am readily
familiar with the normal business practice of the law offices of DiNapoli & Sibley for the
collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the U. S. Postal Service, and that
practice is that correspondence is deposited with the U. S. Postal Service the same day as the
day of collection in the ordinary course of business.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
On the date set forth below, following the ordinary business practice, I served the
following document(s):
NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
by enclosing a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope and placing it for collection and service
that same day in the ordinary course of business.
__X__(By e-mail) I caused such document(s) to be served by e-mail to defendants’ counsel
Carlos G. Martinez and R. Jeremie Ginelli at the following addresses: cmartin@isonlaw.com
and rjg@carlsonlawgroup.com.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true
and correct and that I executed this Proof of Service in the City of San Jose, California, on July
13, 2011
/s/
JOHN DINAPOLI
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL
C:\Cases\Apex\Dismiss.Fed.wpd
3
Case No. 11-CV-02051-EJD
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?