Moralez v. Diekgers, 3:17-cv-03486-WHO. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180409814
Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2018
Summary: CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL UPON SETTLEMENT Re: Dkt. No. 29 WILLIAM H. ORRICK , District Judge . The parties have provided notice that they have settled this matter. Dkt. No. 29. Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. If any party certifies to this Court, with proper notice to opposing counsel within ninety (90) days from the date below, that settlement has not in fact occurred, this order shall be vacated and this cause shall be restored to the calendar for further proceedings.
Summary: CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL UPON SETTLEMENT Re: Dkt. No. 29 WILLIAM H. ORRICK , District Judge . The parties have provided notice that they have settled this matter. Dkt. No. 29. Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. If any party certifies to this Court, with proper notice to opposing counsel within ninety (90) days from the date below, that settlement has not in fact occurred, this order shall be vacated and this cause shall be restored to the calendar for further proceedings. I..
More
CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL UPON SETTLEMENT
Re: Dkt. No. 29
WILLIAM H. ORRICK, District Judge.
The parties have provided notice that they have settled this matter. Dkt. No. 29. Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. If any party certifies to this Court, with proper notice to opposing counsel within ninety (90) days from the date below, that settlement has not in fact occurred, this order shall be vacated and this cause shall be restored to the calendar for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
