Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01462/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01462-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-1-

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER THEREUPON

Cyndikay Martinez Perales v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Case No.1:05-CV-01462-REC-DLB

Gregory L. Spallas – SBN 129306

Kristin L. Oliveira – SBN 204384

PHILLIPS, SPALLAS & ANGSTADT LLP

650 California Street, Tenth Floor

San Francisco, California 94108

Telephone: (415) 278-9400

Facsimile: (415) 278-9411

Attorneys for Defendant

WAL-MART STORES, INC.

Fernando Tafoya, Esq. – SBN 146893

TAFOYA & ASSOCIATES

1044 N. Van Ness Avenue

Fresno, CA 93728

Telephone: (559) 237-0200

Facsimile: (559) 4886-3216

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

CYNDIKAY MARTINEZ PERALES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CYNDIKAY MARTINEZ PERALES,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

WAL-MART STORES, INC., AND DOES 1-

100,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:05-CV-01462 AWI DLB

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE AND

ORDER THEREUPON

TO THE COURT: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between plaintiff CYNDIKAY

MARTINEZ PERALES and defendant WAL-MART STORES, INC., by and through their

respective counsel of record, that the above-captioned action be and hereby is dismissed with

Case 1:05-cv-01462-AWI-DLB Document 18 Filed 06/23/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-2-

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER THEREUPON

Cyndikay Martinez Perales v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Case No.1:05-CV-01462-REC-DLB

prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) as the parties have reached an

informal resolution. 

Dated: __________________ By: ______________________________/s/_

 Fernando Tafoya

Attorney for Plaintiff

CYNDIKAY MARTINEZ PERALES

 

Dated: __________________ 

By: _______________________________/s/

 Kristin L. Oliveira 

 PHILLIPS, SPALLAS & ANGSTADT LLP

Attorneys for Defendant

 WAL-MART STORES, INC.

ORDER

The parties seek dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) by filing a

notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer

or of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first occurs, or (ii) by filing a

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action.

Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is

without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication

upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court of

the United States or of any state an action based on or including the same claim.

Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an

answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties who have appeared,

although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. & Loan

Asso., 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir.

Case 1:05-cv-01462-AWI-DLB Document 18 Filed 06/23/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-3-

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER THEREUPON

Cyndikay Martinez Perales v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Case No.1:05-CV-01462-REC-DLB

1986). Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in

open court, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. Pro.

41(a)(1)(ii); Eitel, 782 F.2d at 1473 n.4. Because Plaintiff has filed a stipulation for dismissal

with prejudice as to all parties under Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) that is signed by all parties who have made

an appearance, this case has terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d

at 466; Gardiner, 747 F.2d at 1189; see also Gambale, 377 F.3d at 139; Commercial Space

Mgmt, 193 F.3d at 1077; cf. Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED and the Clerk of

the Court is DIRECTED to close this case in light of the parties’ filed and signed Rule

41(a)(1)(ii) Stipulation For Dismissal With Prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 23, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01462-AWI-DLB Document 18 Filed 06/23/06 Page 3 of 3