Goins v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, 1:15-cv-01738-DAD-JLT. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20160527859
Visitors: 4
Filed: May 25, 2016
Latest Update: May 25, 2016
Summary: AMENDED ORDER REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THE CASE (Doc. Nos. 24 and 25) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On May 19, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing the action in its entirety and with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. (Doc. No. 24.) The parties specifically stipulated to dismissal of plaintiff's individual claims with prejudice, and to dismissal of the class claims without prejudice. ( Id. ) On May 20, 2016, an order issued closing the case "in ligh
Summary: AMENDED ORDER REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THE CASE (Doc. Nos. 24 and 25) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On May 19, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing the action in its entirety and with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. (Doc. No. 24.) The parties specifically stipulated to dismissal of plaintiff's individual claims with prejudice, and to dismissal of the class claims without prejudice. ( Id. ) On May 20, 2016, an order issued closing the case "in light..
More
AMENDED ORDER REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THE CASE
(Doc. Nos. 24 and 25)
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
On May 19, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing the action in its entirety and with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. (Doc. No. 24.) The parties specifically stipulated to dismissal of plaintiff's individual claims with prejudice, and to dismissal of the class claims without prejudice. (Id.) On May 20, 2016, an order issued closing the case "in light of the voluntary dismissal with prejudice filed and properly signed pursuant to Rule 41." (Doc. No. 25.) The court now clarifies that, pursuant to the parties' stipulation, plaintiff's individual claims have been dismissed with prejudice and the class claims have been dismissed without prejudice, and without an award of attorneys' fees and costs to any party. The Clerk of the Court was properly directed to close the case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
