Guerrero v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Guerrero v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 231 F. Supp. 3d 797
District Court, E.D. California·Decided October 16, 2019·No. 1:16-cv-01300·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LUIS GUERRERO on behalf of himself, all CASE NO. 1:16-cv-01300-LJO-JLT others similarly situated, and on behalf of the 12 general public, ORDER CLOSING THE ACTION 13 Plaintiff, (Doc. 50)

14 v.

15 HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1-100, 16 Defendants. 17

18 The parties have settled their case and have stipulated to the action being dismissed with 19 prejudice. (Doc. 50) The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 41 makes such stipulations 20 effective immediately with further order of the Court. Because all parties who have appeared in 21 the action signed the stipulation (Doc. 22), it “automatically terminate[d] the action.” Wilson v. 22 City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is 23 DIRECTED to close this action. This order is without prejudice to the prospective class. 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED.

27 Dated: October 16, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Guerrero v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., (E.D. Cal. 2019).

Guerrero v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (Guerrero v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. City of San Jose
111 F.3d 688 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)