Amsted Industries Incorporated v. Tianrui Group Foundry Company, Ltd. et al

Filing 92

ORDER granting 90 MOTION to Dismiss (Unopposed) filed by Amsted Industries Incorporated. As this Order disposes of all remaining parties and claims, the Clerk is instructed to close the file. Thus, 47 MOTION to Transfer Case and Brief in Support and 38 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation are RENDERED MOOT. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 2/21/2012. (mtm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
AMSTED INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED
Plaintiff,
v.

No. 11-cv-659-DRH-SCW

STANDARD CAR TRUCK
COMPANY, INC., WESTINGHOUSE
AIR BRAKE TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION,
and OMNICAST, LLC,
Defendants.
ORDER
HERNDON, Chief Judge:
Pending before the Court is plaintiff Amsted Industries Incorporated’s
(Amsted) unopposed motion to dismiss (Doc. 90). Amsted seeks dismissal with
prejudice of defendants Standard Car Truck Company, Inc. (SCT) and
Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation (Wabtec) and all claims
asserted by and against plaintiff and such parties pursuant to FEDERAL RULE

OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(a)(2).
Additionally, plaintiff seeks dismissal without prejudice of all claims
Amsted has asserted against defendant Omnicast, LLC, (Omnicast) pursuant to
Rule 41(a)(2). Amsted cites a confidential settlement agreement as the impetus of
this unopposed motion. Rule 41(a)(2) allows a court to consider whether it is
proper to order a party dismissed, upon the plaintiff’s motion.

“The

determination of whether to grant a motion for voluntary dismissal rests within
Page 1 of 2

the sound discretion of the district court.” Tyco Labs., Inc. v. Koppers Co., Inc.,
627 F.2d 54, 56 (7th Cir. 1980).

As Amsted informs the Court it has entered

into a confidential settlement agreement of all pending claims with the remaining
defendants to this action, the Court finds said dismissal is proper. Further, as
this Order disposes of all remaining parties and claims to this action, the Clerk is
instructed to close the file. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Amsted’s unopposed
motion and dismisses with prejudice all claims against and by SCT and Wabtec
and without prejudice all claims against Omnicast (Doc. 90).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 21st day of February, 2012.

David R. Herndon
2012.02.21
15:01:28 -06'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court

Page 2 of 2