Panacea Scientific, Inc. v. ATM Metabolics, LLC. et al
Filing
37
ORDER dismissing with prejudice this action per ECF No. 36 Stipulation. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/25/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
ALEXANDER D. BROWN, Fla Bar No.: 752665, Pro Hac Vice
ADAM S. GOLDMAN, Fla. Bar No.: 86761, Pro Hac Vice
The Concept Law Group, P.A.
6400 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309
Telephone: (754) 300-1325
ABrown@ConceptLaw.com
AGoldman@ConceptLaw.com
W. WEST ALLEN, Nevada Bar No.: 5566
Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Telephone: (702) 257-1483
WAllen@HowardandHoward.com
Counsel for Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff ATM Metabolics, LLC
and Defendant M. Joseph Ahrens
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
12
13
14
PANACEA SCIENTIFIC, INC., a Nevada
Corporation
15
16
17
18
Plaintiff,
vs.
ATM METABOLICS, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company, and M. JOSEPH AHRENS,
an individual
19
20
21
22
25
JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Defendants.
-----------------------------ATM METABOLICS, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company,
23
24
Case No.: 2:17-cv-00869-MMD-VCF
Counter-Plaintiff,
vs.
PANACEA SCIENTIFIC, INC., a Nevada
Corporation,
26
27
28
1
1
2
3
4
Counter-Defendant,
-----------------------------ATM METABOLICS, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company,
Third-Party Plaintiff,
5
vs.
6
7
8
CHAD A. LACHAPELLE, an individual,
Third-Party Defendant.
9
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff, ATM METABOLICS, LLC (“ATM”), and Plaintiff/Counter10
11
Defendant, PANACEA SCIENTIFIC, INC. (“Panacea”) (collectively the “Parties”), pursuant to
12
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), hereby voluntarily dismiss this action, with
13
prejudice, with each Party to bear its own fees and costs.
14
15
Dated this 25th day of July, 2017.
Respectfully submitted,
16
17
LAW OFFICE OF BRENT ELLISON
THE CONCEPT LAW GROUP, P.A.
18
By: /s/ Brent T. Ellison
BRENT T. ELLISON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 12200
600 South Third Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: (702) 852-1800
Email: brent@mynevadalawoffice.com
Attorney for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
Panacea Scientific, Inc., and Third-Party
Defendant, Chad A. LaChappelle
By: /s/ Alexander D. Brown
ALEXANDER D. BROWN, ESQ.
Fla. Bar No. 752665 (pro hac vice)
ADAM S. GOLDMAN, ESQ.
Fla. Bar No. 86761 (pro hac vice)
6400 North Andrews Ave., Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309
Telephone: (754) 300-1500
Email: abrown@conceptlaw.com
Email: agoldman@conceptlaw.com
Attorneys for Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff and
Third-Party ATM Metabolics, LLC., and
Defendant, Dr. M. Joseph Ahrens
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
FLANGAS LAW FIRM LTD
LEO P. FLANGAS, ESQ
Nevada Bar No.: 5637
600 South Third Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone.: (702) 384-1990
Facsimile: (702)-384-1009
Email: leo@flangaslawfirm.com
Attorney for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
Panacea Scientific, Inc., and Third-Party
Defendant, Chad A. LaChappelle
8
9
10
HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC
W. WEST ALLEN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 5566
WADE GOCHNOUR. ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 6314
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 1000
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Telephone: (702) 457-1483
Email: wwa@h2law.com
Email: wgochnour@howardandhoward.com
Attorneys for Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff and
Third-Party ATM Metabolics, LLC., and
Defendant, Dr. M. Joseph Ahrens
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on July 25, 2017, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was
11
electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice
12
13
of electronic filing to counsel of record receiving electronic notification.
/s/ Alexander D. Brown
14
15
16
17
JOINT STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE is granted.
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
20
21
July 25, 2017
Dated: _________________
______________________
U.S. District Judge
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?