Starace v. Lexington Law Firm ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 MARTIN STARACE, individually and on behalf ) Case No. 1:18-cv-01596-DAD-SKO of all others similarly situated, ) 10 ) ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK Plaintiff, ) OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE 11 ) v. ) (Doc. 28) 12 ) LEXINGTON LAW FIRM, and DOES 1 through ) 13 10, ) ) 14 Defendant. ) ) 15 16 On January 16, 2020, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing Plaintiff Martin Starace’s 17 individual claims with prejudice, and the putative class claims without prejudice. (Doc. 28.) 18 In light of the parties’ stipulation, Plaintiff’s individual claims have been dismissed with 19 prejudice, the putative class claims have been dismissed without prejudice, and this action has been 20 terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 21 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Sheila K. Oberto 24 Dated: January 21, 2020 /s/ . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28