RICHTER v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, C 12 5646 MEJ. (2013)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20130201c31
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jan. 31, 2013
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2013
Summary: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL AND STIPULATION; PROPOSED ORDER FRCP 41(a)(1)(B) MARIA ELENA JAMES, District Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and among the parties through their respective counsel that all of Plaintiffs' claims against all Defendants (City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Department of Public Health and DOES 1-20), in the above-captioned action be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). The parties will bear their own c
Summary: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL AND STIPULATION; PROPOSED ORDER FRCP 41(a)(1)(B) MARIA ELENA JAMES, District Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and among the parties through their respective counsel that all of Plaintiffs' claims against all Defendants (City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Department of Public Health and DOES 1-20), in the above-captioned action be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). The parties will bear their own co..
More
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL AND STIPULATION; PROPOSED ORDER FRCP 41(a)(1)(B)
MARIA ELENA JAMES, District Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and among the parties through their respective counsel that all of Plaintiffs' claims against all Defendants (City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Department of Public Health and DOES 1-20), in the above-captioned action be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).
The parties will bear their own costs and fees.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all of Plaintiffs' claims against all Defendants (City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Department of Public Health and DOES 1-20), are dismissed with prejudice. The parties will bear their own costs and fees.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
