California Expanded Metal Products Company v. Klein, C18-0659JLR. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20200106b32
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 03, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 03, 2020
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT JUDGMENT JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is Defendants James A. Klein, Safti-Seal, Inc., and BlazeFrame Industries Ltd.'s (collectively, "Defendants") and Plaintiffs California Expanded Metal Products Company and Clarkwestern Dietrich Building Systems (collectively, "Plaintiffs") stipulated motion for approval of a consent judgment. (Stip. Mot. (Dkt. # 161).) The court has reviewed the proposed consent judgment and permanent
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT JUDGMENT JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is Defendants James A. Klein, Safti-Seal, Inc., and BlazeFrame Industries Ltd.'s (collectively, "Defendants") and Plaintiffs California Expanded Metal Products Company and Clarkwestern Dietrich Building Systems (collectively, "Plaintiffs") stipulated motion for approval of a consent judgment. (Stip. Mot. (Dkt. # 161).) The court has reviewed the proposed consent judgment and permanent i..
More
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT JUDGMENT
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
Before the court is Defendants James A. Klein, Safti-Seal, Inc., and BlazeFrame Industries Ltd.'s (collectively, "Defendants") and Plaintiffs California Expanded Metal Products Company and Clarkwestern Dietrich Building Systems (collectively, "Plaintiffs") stipulated motion for approval of a consent judgment. (Stip. Mot. (Dkt. # 161).) The court has reviewed the proposed consent judgment and permanent injunction (Dkt. # 159), the stipulated motion, the relevant portions of the record, and the applicable law. Being fully advised, the court GRANTS the stipulated motion for approval of a consent judgment (Dkt. # 161). The court DIRECTS the Clerk to close this matter. In accordance with the terms of the consent judgment and permanent injunction, the court will retain jurisdiction over this matter. Any party may seek to re-open this matter in order to enforce the terms of the consent judgment and permanent injunction.
Source: Leagle
