SKOUT, INC. v. JEN PROCESSING, LTD., 14-02341 RS. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160314776
Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 10, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 10, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANTS IDOYA LIMITED AND NORMAN DEMAJO AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF IDOYA LIMITED AND NORMAN DEMAJO WITH PREJUDICE WHEREAS, Plaintiff Skout, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed its First Amended Complaint for Breach of Contract; Fraud; Unfair or Deceptive Business Practices; Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; Violation of the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act; and Violat
Summary: STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANTS IDOYA LIMITED AND NORMAN DEMAJO AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF IDOYA LIMITED AND NORMAN DEMAJO WITH PREJUDICE WHEREAS, Plaintiff Skout, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed its First Amended Complaint for Breach of Contract; Fraud; Unfair or Deceptive Business Practices; Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; Violation of the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act; and Violati..
More
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANTS IDOYA LIMITED AND NORMAN DEMAJO AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF IDOYA LIMITED AND NORMAN DEMAJO WITH PREJUDICE
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Skout, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed its First Amended Complaint for Breach of Contract; Fraud; Unfair or Deceptive Business Practices; Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; Violation of the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act; and Violation of the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act on May 29, 2015.
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants Idoya Limited and Norman Demajo settled this matter on or about March 2016.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff and Defendants Idoya Limited and Norman Demajo through their designated counsel that the above-captioned action should be dismissed with prejudice as to Defendants Idoya Limited and Norman Demajo pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2). The parties further stipulate that, except as set forth in the March 2016 Settlement Agreement between them, the parties shall bear their own attorney's fees, expenses, and costs.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
ORDER
The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefor, orders as follows:
1. The action is dismissed with prejudice as against Defendant Idoya Limited pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2).
2. The action is dismissed with prejudice as against Defendant Norman Demajo pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2).
3. Each party shall bear their own costs and attorneys' fees.
4. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter, only to the extent necessary, to enforce the terms of the March 2016 Settlement Agreement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
