Bally Gaming, Inc. v. Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. et al
Filing
47
ORDER Granting 46 Stipulation of Dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 5/4/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
Case 2:16-cv-02359-JCM-CWH Document 46 Filed 05/03/17 Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
J. Randall Jones (Nev. Bar No. 1927)
r.jones@kempjones.com
Spencer H. Gunnerson (Nev. Bar No. 8810)
s.gunnerson@kempjones.com
KEMP, JONES & COULTHARD, LLP
3800 Howard Hughes Pkwy, 17th Floor
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Telephone: (702) 385-6000
Timothy C. Meece (admitted pro hac vice)
tmeece@bannerwitcoff.com
Michael J. Harris (admitted pro hac vice)
mharris@bannerwitcoff.com
Audra C. Eidem Heinze (admitted pro hac vice)
aheinze@bannerwitcoff.com
BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD.
Ten South Wacker Drive, Suite 3000
Chicago, Illinois 60606-7407
Telephone: (312) 463-5000
Attorneys for Plaintiff Bally Gaming, Inc.
13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
16
* * *
17
18
BALLY GAMING, INC.
Plaintiff,
v.
19
20
21
22
Case No.: 2-16-cv-02359-JCM-CWH
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER OF
DISMISSAL
ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
VIDEO GAMING TECHNOLOGIES,
INC., AND ARISTOCRAT LEISURE
LIMITED
Defendants.
23
24
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), Plaintiff Bally Gaming, Inc.
25
(“Bally”) and Defendants Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. (“ATI”), Video Gaming Technologies,
26
Inc. (“VGT”), and Aristocrat Leisure Limited (“ALL”) (ATI, VGT, and ALL collectively,
27
“Aristocrat”) (Bally and Aristocrat collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective
1
Case 2:16-cv-02359-JCM-CWH Document 46 Filed 05/03/17 Page 2 of 3
1
counsel, hereby agree and stipulate as follows:
2
1.
Bally filed a Complaint in this matter on October 10, 2016. ECF No. 1.
3
2.
VGT filed an Answer on January 4, 2017. ECF No. 26. ATI and ALL filed
Motions to Dismiss on December 5, 2016. ECF Nos. 21, 22.
3.
The Parties have reached a settlement of all disputes in this case (the “Settlement
Agreement”). As part of the Settlement Agreement, the Parties have agreed to
dismiss all claims in this case with prejudice.
4
5
6
WHEREFORE, pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Parties respectfully request
7
8
that the Court approve this stipulation and order as follows: (1) all claims asserted by the Parties
9
in any pleading in this action are dismissed with prejudice; (2) no Party shall be deemed a
10
“prevailing party” within the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54 or Local Rule 54-1;
11
///
12
///
13
///
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2
Case 2:16-cv-02359-JCM-CWH Document 46 Filed 05/03/17 Page 3 of 3
1
(3) each Party shall bear its own costs, disbursements and attorneys’ fees; and (4) this Court shall
2
retain exclusive jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement and this Order of Dismissal.
3
4
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 3rd day of May, 2017.
For Plaintiff Bally Gaming, Inc.
For Defendants Aristocrat Technologies, Inc.,
Video Gaming Technologies, Inc. and
Aristocrat Leisure Limited:
/s/ Spencer H. Gunnerson
J. RANDALL JONES (#1927)
SPENCER H. GUNNERSON (#8810)
KEMP, JONES & COULTHARD, LLP
3800 Howard Hughes Pkwy, 17th Floor
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Tel: (702) 385-6000
/s/ Nicholas J. Santoro
NICHOLAS J. SANTORO (#532)
SANTORO WHITMIRE, LTD.
10100 W. Charleston Blvd., Suite 250
Las Vegas, Nevada 89135
Tel: (702) 948-8771
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
ROBERT T. HASLAM
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Tel: (650) 632-4700
TIMOTHY C. MEECE
MICHAEL J. HARRIS
AUDRA C. EIDEM HEINZE
BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD.
Ten South Wacker Drive, Suite 3000
Chicago, Illinois 60606-7407
Tel: (312) 463-5000
GARY M. RUBMAN
PETER A. SWANSON
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
One CityCenter, 850 Tenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Tel: (202) 662-6000
15
16
17
18
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED:
21
________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
22
23
24
May 4, 2017
DATED: _______________
25
26
27
3
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?