Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

FORTINET, INC. v. SOPHOS, INC., 3:13-cv-05831-EMC. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20151222a42 Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 18, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 18, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Fortinet, Inc., Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs Sophos, Inc. and Sophos Ltd., and Defendants Michael Valentine and Jason Clark, through their attorneys of record and subject to the approval of the Court, that pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), all claims and counterclaims in the above-captioned action are dis
More

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Fortinet, Inc., Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs Sophos, Inc. and Sophos Ltd., and Defendants Michael Valentine and Jason Clark, through their attorneys of record and subject to the approval of the Court, that pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), all claims and counterclaims in the above-captioned action are dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. All claims and counter-claims in the above-captioned action are dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer