SOAPROJECTS, INC. v. SWAMINATHAN

Case No. 16-CV-03982-NC.

SOAPROJECTS, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. JAYARAMAN SWAMINATHAN, an individual; APPWRAP, LLC, a California limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants.

United States District Court, N.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

SOAProjects, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by Nitoj P. Singh , Dhillon Law Group Inc..

SOAProjects, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by Rachel Kung-Lan Loh , Dhillon Law Group, Inc. & Harmeet K. Dhillon , Dhillon Law Group Inc..

Jayaraman Swaminathan, Defendant, represented by Scott Gregory Lawson , Pennington Lawson LLP & Ian Worthington Forgie , Pennington Lawson LLP.

APPWRAP, INC., Defendant, represented by Scott Gregory Lawson , Pennington Lawson LLP & Ian Worthington Forgie , Pennington Lawson LLP.


SAN JOSE DIVISION JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE AND COURT RETAIN JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT; ORDER

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff SOAProjects, Inc. ("SOAProjects"); Defendant Jayaraman Swaminathan ("Swaminathan"), and Defendant AppWrap, LLC ("AppWrap") (Swaminathan and AppWrap, collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their respective attorneys, file this stipulation pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and stipulate that:

1. SOAProjects and Defendants attended a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on February 6, 2017;

2. The parties reached a settlement of this matter at the settlement conference, which was read into the record, and is reflected at Dkt. No. 24;

3. Pursuant to the settlement, inter alia:

a. all claims or causes of action that were asserted by SOAProjects against Defendants in the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) are to be dismissed with prejudice; b. each party is to bear its own attorneys' fees and costs; and

4. SOAProjects and Defendants jointly request that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties' settlement agreement.

Accordingly, SOAProjects and Defendants request that the Court dismiss this matter with prejudice, and retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement reached by the parties.

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' Joint Stipulation of Dismissal of Action with Prejudice, and good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. All claims or causes of action that were asserted by SOAProjects against Defendants in the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) are hereby dismissed with prejudice;

2. Each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs;

3. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties' settlement agreement; and

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases