Che v. Express Fashions Operations, LLC
Filing
22
AMENDED ORDER RE STIPULATION DISMISSING CASE. Case dismissed with prejudice, each side to bear its own fees and costs. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 6/17/2016. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/20/2016)
1
2
3
4
ASCENSION LAW GROUP
PAMELA TSAO( 266734)
2030 E. 4th Street
Suite 205
Santa Ana, CA 92705
PH: 714.783.4220
FAX: 888.505.1033
Pamela.Tsao@ascensionlawgroup.com
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff NGOC LAM CHE
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
NGOC LAM CHE, an individual
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
EXPRESS FASHIONS OPERATIONS, LLC, )
dba “EXPRESS” a limited liability company; )
DOES 1 through 10,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 5:15-cv-04236-HRL
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE STIPULATION
OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
[Re: Dkt. 20]
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER
5:15-CV-04236-HRL
1
Pursuant to the parties’ “Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice,” and good cause
2
appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendant shall be dismissed with
3
prejudice in the above-captioned action. Each party shall bear his or its own costs and attorney’s
4
fees.
5
6
7
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED
June 17, 2016
Dated ______________________
________________________________
Magistrate Judge, United States District Court,
Northern Central District of California
Howard R. Lloyd
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER
5:15-CV-01620-PSG
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?