Rush Air Sports, LLC v. RDJ Group Holdings, LLC

District Court, E.D. California·Decided January 26, 2021·No. 1:19-cv-00385·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3

6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 RUSH AIR SPORTS, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-00385 NONE JLT ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO ) ASSIGN A DISTRICT AND TO CLOSE THIS 13 v. ) ) CASE 14 RDJ GROUP HOLDINGS, LLC, et al., ) (Doc. 80) ) 15 Defendants. ) ) 16 _____________________________________ ) ) 17 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION ) ) 18

19 The parties have stipulated to the action and cross action to being dismissed with prejudice and 20 with each party to bear their own fees and costs (Doc. 80 at 2). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 21 Rule 41 makes such stipulations effective immediately with further order of the Court. Wilson v. City 22 of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to 23 assign a District Judge to this action for purposes of closing this case and to close this action. 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 Dated: January 25, 2021 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 27 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

Rush Air Sports, LLC v. RDJ Group Holdings, LLC, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

Rush Air Sports, LLC v. RDJ Group Holdings, LLC (Rush Air Sports, LLC v. RDJ Group Holdings, LLC) — 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)