Filed: May 13, 2015
Latest Update: May 13, 2015
Summary: [PROPOSED] ORDER SAMUEL CONTI , District Judge . The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefore, orders as follows: 1. All claims asserted by plaintiffs Sears, Roebuck and Co., and Kmart Corp., against defendants Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI America, Inc., Samsung SDI Mexico S.A. De C.V., Samsung SDI Brasil Ltda., Shenzhen Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Tianjin Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd (collectively "Samsung SD
Summary: [PROPOSED] ORDER SAMUEL CONTI , District Judge . The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefore, orders as follows: 1. All claims asserted by plaintiffs Sears, Roebuck and Co., and Kmart Corp., against defendants Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI America, Inc., Samsung SDI Mexico S.A. De C.V., Samsung SDI Brasil Ltda., Shenzhen Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Tianjin Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd (collectively "Samsung SDI..
More
[PROPOSED] ORDER
SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge.
The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefore, orders as follows:
1. All claims asserted by plaintiffs Sears, Roebuck and Co., and Kmart Corp., against defendants Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI America, Inc., Samsung SDI Mexico S.A. De C.V., Samsung SDI Brasil Ltda., Shenzhen Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Tianjin Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd (collectively "Samsung SDI") are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
2. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees.
3. This Order is not a dismissal of any person or entity other than Samsung SDI.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
