Bahou v. Prism Technologies Group, Inc. et al
Filing
130
AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL - The parties shall comply with the terms of their settlement agreement entered into on or about July 16, 2019. By consent of the parties, the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement. Except as provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2, above, this case is dismissed, with prejudice, and each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (KLF)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
OMAHA DIVISION
ANDRE J. BAHOU,
PLAINTIFF
v.
PRISM TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC.,
PRISM TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
GREGORY J. DUMAN, L. ERIC LOEWE,
STEVEN J. YASUDA, AND
HUSSEIN A. ENAN,
DEFENDANTS
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CASE NO. 8:17-CV-00462
AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL
The parties submitted to this Court a Joint Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 129] in which they
advised the Court that they have settled all claims and controversies at issue and asked this Court
to dismiss this suit with prejudice, while retaining jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties’
settlement agreement pursuant to Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America, 511 U.S.
375, 381-82 (1994) and Gilbert v. Monsanto Co., 216 F.3d 695, 699 (8th Cir. 2000). The Court
grants the parties’ joint motion; accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1.
The parties shall comply with the terms of their settlement agreement entered into
on or about July 16, 2019;
2.
By consent of the parties, the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of
enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement.
Except as provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2, above, this case is dismissed, with prejudice,
and each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs.
Signed this 31st day of July, 2019.
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
Senior United States District Judge
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?