Kemmer v. USAA Savings Bank

Opinion

LYNNE KEMMER, No. 1:19-cv-00116-AWI-SKO Plaintiff, v. ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE (Doc. 19) Defendant.

On August 28, 2019, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing the action with prejudice.1 (Doc. 19.) In light of the parties’ stipulation, this action has been terminated, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997), and has // //

1 The parties also requested, in their Notice of Settlement, that the Court “retain jurisdiction for sixty (60) days for any matters related to completing and/or enforcing the settlement and stay all remaining discovery deadlines.” (Doc. 17 at 1.) On August 26, 2019, the Court allowed the parties sixty days in which to complete the settlement and file dispositional documents requesting the dismissal of the action, and vacated all other deadlines. (Doc. 18.) To the extent the parties request that the Court retain jurisdiction beyond the dismissal of the case, the Court in its discretion denies the parties’ request. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 381–82 (1994); Camacho v. City of San Luis, 359 F. App’x 794, 798 (9th Cir. 2009). Cf. California Sportfishing Prot. All. v. Agric. Mgmt. & Prod. Co., Inc., No. 2:14-cv-02328-KJM-AC, 2016 WL 4796841, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2016) (noting that “the court in its discretion typically declines to maintain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement,” but making “an exception” and retaining jurisdiction where the parties “engaged in significant settlement discussions with the assigned magistrate judge prior to ultimately settling according to terms of their Consent Agreement.”). been dismissed with prejudice. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto Dated: September 2, 2019 /s/ . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE