Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

ROBERT BOSCH LLC v. ADM 21 CO., LTD., 2:10-cv-01930-MMD-RJJ. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20140205c92 Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 04, 2014
Latest Update: Feb. 04, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge. WHEREAS, Robert Bosch LLC ("BOSCH") instituted this patent-infringement action against ADM21 Co., Ltd., ADM USA, and ADM North America (collectively, "ADM") on November 3, 2010, WHEREAS, this patent-infringement action was stayed on January 3, 2012, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1659(a), in light of the investigation in the United States International Trade Commission, captioned In re Certain Wiper Blades, In
More

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.

WHEREAS, Robert Bosch LLC ("BOSCH") instituted this patent-infringement action against ADM21 Co., Ltd., ADM USA, and ADM North America (collectively, "ADM") on November 3, 2010,

WHEREAS, this patent-infringement action was stayed on January 3, 2012, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1659(a), in light of the investigation in the United States International Trade Commission, captioned In re Certain Wiper Blades, Inv. No. 337-TA-816 (D.I. 104), and

WHEREAS, the parties have entered into a settlement agreement to resolve this action and the corresponding investigation in the United States International Trade Commission, captioned In re Certain Wiper Blades, Inv. No. 337-TA-816, with an effective date of January 27, 2014.

THEREFORE, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a), BOSCH and ADM hereby stipulate to the dismissal of all of BOSCH's claims in this action with prejudice. BOSCH and ADM further stipulate to the dismissal of all of ADM's counterclaims in this action with prejudice, with the exception that ADM shall not be barred by this dismissal from asserting any or all such counterclaims in response to any assertion by Bosch of infringement by ADM of any of the patents-in-suit. Each party will bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. The parties consent to and request that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of their settlement agreement under the authority of Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375 (1994).

SO ORDERED.

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