Sanchez v. Peacock Cupertino, Inc et al

Filing 13

STIPULATION AND ORDER 12 to Remand to State Court. ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 9/27/13. (jgS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

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 Plaintiff
NAHUM HERNANDEZ SANCHEZ

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16

NAHUM HERNANDEZ SANCHEZ,
Plaintiff,

Case No.: CV 13-02107 RMW-HRL
STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE
TO STATE COURT

v.
PEACOCK CUPERTINO, INC.; JAY AND
RAM; RAMCHANDER GOPALSWAMY; and
VEERAVENKATA DURGAPRASAD
VASIREDDY,

17
18

Defendants.

19
20
21
22

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

been served. Docket No. 6.

23
24

The Complaint was filed on May 8, 2013. Docket No. 1. All Defendants have

2.

The parties have met and conferred on the merits of the case and agree that the
proper venue should be the Superior Court of California.

25

3.

The parties agree to toll any statute of limitations in effect. Plaintiff shall suffer
-1-

STIPULATION TO REMAND
CASE TO STATE COURT

1

no prejudice in remanding this matter to the Superior Court of California, and all

2

of his rights in litigation are preserved in relation to the date of the filing of the
Complaint in this action.

3
4

IT IS SO STIPULATED

5
6

FOR PLAINTIFF
DATED:

September 16, 2013

By:

//s//Huy Tran//s//
TOMAS MARGAIN
HUY TRAN
For Plaintiff

By:

//s//
GAUTAM DUTTA
For Defendants

7
8
9
FOR DEFENDANTS

10
11

DATED:

September 20, 2013

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

-2STIPULATION TO REMAND
CASE TO STATE COURT

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
SAN JOSE DIVISION
4
5
6
7
8
9

NAHUM HERNANDEZ SANCHEZ,

Case No.: CV 13-02107 RMW-HRL

Plaintiff,

[] ORDER GRANTING
THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO
REMAND CASE TO STATE COURT

v.
PEACOCK CUPERTINO, INC.; JAY AND
RAM; RAMCHANDER GOPALSWAMY; and
VEERAVENKATA DURGAPRASAD
VASIREDDY,

10
11
12
13
14

Defendants.
Based on the stipulation of counsel and good cause shown, this matter is remanded to the
Superior Court of California. All applicable statute of limitations are tolled and Plaintiff’s rights
in litigation are preserved as of May 8, 2013, the date the Complaint in this action was filed.

15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED
17
18

DATED:

By:
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

-3STIPULATION TO REMAND
CASE TO STATE COURT