Baker Hughes Incorporated v. Thor's Oil Products, Inc. et al

Filing 38

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. granting 36 Motion for Entry of Judgment under Rule 54(b); granting 36 Motion for Permanent Injunction. (BG)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA Baker Hughes Incorporated, Plaintiff, vs. Thor’s Oil Products, Inc., et. al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER Case No. 4:15-cv-151 On December 20, 2016, plaintiff filed a Notice of Dismissal without Prejudice as to Dong Shen Lu. On February 1, 2017, plaintiff filed an “Unopposed Motion to Enter Consent Amended Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment” and proposed “Amended Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment.” Therein plaintiff advised that it had reached a settlement with the remaining defendants, Michael Uhyrn and Thor’s Oil Products, Inc. It further advised that the parties’ settlement agreement provides in relevant part that Michael Uhyrn and Thor’s Oil Products, Inc. agree to the terms set forth in the proposed “Amended Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment.” More than fourteen days have lapsed since plaintiff filed its motion. Neither Michael Uhryn nor Thor’s Oil Products, Inc. have filed a response or otherwise objected to issuance of an amended permanent injunction and final judgment as proposed by plaintiff. See D.N.D. Civ. L.R. 7.1(F) (“An adverse party’s failure to serve and file a response to a motion may be deemed an admission that the motion is well taken.”). The court DISMISSES plaintiff’s claims as to Dong Shen Lu without prejudice and GRANTS plaintiff’s motion (Docket No. 36). The court shall issue a separate Amended Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 21st day of February, 2017. /s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr. Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge United States District Court 2

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?