Ramirez et al v. ISB Mehta Corp et al

Filing 23

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 22 Stipulation.(lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/9/2013)

Case5:13-cv-00605-LHK Document22 Filed08/08/13 Page1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

TOMAS E. MARGAIN, Bar No. 193555
HUY TRAN, Bar No. 288196
Justice at Work Law Group
84 W. Santa Clara St., Ste. 790
San Jose, CA 95113
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RODOLFO RAMIREZ and
JOSE A RAMIREZ HERNANDEZ
BRIAN P. MOQUIN, SBN 257583
408.300.0022 / 408.843.1678 fax
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN P. MOQUIN
3506 LA CASTELLET COURT
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95148
Attorneys for Defendants
ISB MEHTA CORP. and VIPUL J. MEHTA

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN JOSE DIVISION

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

RODOLFO RAMIREZ and JOSE A.
RAMIREZ HERNANDEZ,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ISB MEHTA CORP. and VIPUL J. MEHTA,

Case No.: CV 13-0605 LHK
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE; COURT
TO RETAIN JURISDICTION TO
ENFORCE SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT

Defendants.

23
24
25

-1STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

Case5:13-cv-00605-LHK Document22 Filed08/08/13 Page2 of 3

1
2
3
4

THE PARTIES, THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, HEREBY
STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:
1.

This matter has fully settled and the parties have executed a written settlement

agreement.

5

2.

The parties request that the Court immediately dismiss this case with prejudice.

6

3.

The parties request that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement

7
8
9
10
11

agreement through December 5, 2013.
4.

The parties further request that the Order dismissing this case be without

prejudice to the parties enforcing the settlement agreement in a separate proceeding after
December 5, 2013.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.

12
13

FOR PLAINTIFFS:

14
15

DATED:

August 7, 2013

16
17

By: //s//Huy Tran//s//
TOMAS MARGAIN
HUY TRAN
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RODOLFO RAMIREZ and
JOSE A. RAMIREZ HERNANDEZ

18
19

FOR DEFENDANTS:

20

LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN P. MOQUIN

21
22
23
24

DATED:

August 8, 2013

By:

/s/ BRIAN P MOQUIN
BRIAN P. MOQUIN
Attorneys for Defendants
ISB MEHTA CORP. and
VIPUL J. MEHTA

25

-2STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

Case5:13-cv-00605-LHK Document22 Filed08/08/13 Page3 of 3

1

ORDER

2

Based on the stipulation between counsel, and good cause appearing, this matter is

3
4

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All deadlines are hereby vacated.
The parties have reached a settlement through counsel. This Court will retain

5

jurisdiction to hear any motions filed before December 5, 2013 to enforce the settlement

6

agreement. Subsequent to that date, this Order is without prejudice to any party seeking to

7

enforce the settlement agreement in a separate proceeding. The Clerk shall close the file.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10
11

DATED: August 9, 2013
United
Lucy H. Koh States District Court Judge
United States District Court

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

-3STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE