Huerta v. County of Tulare ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JOSEFINA1 HUERTA, Case No. 1:17-cv-01446-EPG 11 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FED. R. 12 v. CIV. P. 41(a) 13 COUNTY OF TULARE, et al., (ECF No. 219). 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 On September 6, 2024, the parties filed a joint stipulation for dismissal with prejudice of 18 all claims in this action and with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. (ECF No. 19 219). 20 In light of the parties’ stipulation, this action has been terminated, Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), and has been dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ 22 fees and costs. 23 Additionally, the parties have requested that the Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the 24 terms of the Settlement Agreement and Addendum. (ECF No. 219 at 2). The Court will retain 25 jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement for one year from the date of this 26 order. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381-82 (1994)) (district 27 1 On August 19, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to substitute Josefina Huerta for the original 28 plaintiff, Ramiro Huerta. 1 | courts may retain ancillary jurisdiction to enforce settlement agreements). 2 Accordingly, 3 e The Court retains continuing jurisdiction over this case to enforce the terms of the 4 Settlement Agreement and Addendum, for one year from the date of this order. 5 e The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Laura Torres-Salcido from the case.” 6 e The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 | Dated: _ September 9, 2024 [spe ey □□ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 | ? Plaintiff has withdrawn all claims against Torres-Salcido. See ECF No. 208 at 10.