Michael Aram, Inc. v. Ross Stores, Inc.

C.D. California

Michael Aram, Inc. v. Ross Stores, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California·Decided October 28, 2022·No. 2:22-cv-06748·Unknown

Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-06748-FMO-AGR Document 14 Filed 10/28/22 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:29

JS-6 MICHAEL ARAM, INC., ) Case No. CV 22-6748 FMO (AGRx) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT ) PREJUDICE ROSS STORES, INC. et al., ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) Having been advised by counsel that the above-entitled action has been settled, (Dkt. 13, Notice of Settlement), IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice to the right, upon good cause shown by no later than November 28, 2022, to re-open the action if settlement is not consummated. The court retains full jurisdiction over this action and this Order shall not prejudice any party to this action. Failure to re-open or seek an extension of time to re-open the action by the deadline set forth above shall be deemed as consent by the parties to dismissal of the action with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388 (1962). Dated this 28th day of October, 2022. /s/ Fernando M. Olguin United States District Judge

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

Case 2:22-cv-06748-FMO-AGR Document 14 Filed 10/28/22 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:29

JS-6 MICHAEL ARAM, INC., ) Case No. CV 22-6748 FMO (AGRx) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT ) PREJUDICE ROSS STORES, INC. et al., ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) Having been advised by counsel that the above-entitled action has been settled, (Dkt. 13, Notice of Settlement), IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice to the right, upon good cause shown by no later than November 28, 2022, to re-open the action if settlement is not consummated. The court retains full jurisdiction over this action and this Order shall not prejudice any party to this action. Failure to re-open or seek an extension of time to re-open the action by the deadline set forth above shall be deemed as consent by the parties to dismissal of the action with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388 (1962). Dated this 28th day of October, 2022. /s/ Fernando M. Olguin United States District Judge

Michael Aram, Inc. v. Ross Stores, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2022).

Pincite

Michael Aram, Inc. v. Ross Stores, Inc. (Michael Aram, Inc. v. Ross Stores, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related