Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01738/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01738-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMIE GOINS, on behalf of herself, all 

others similarly situated, and the general 

public,

Plaintiff,

v.

COSTCO WHOLESALE 

CORPORATION, a Washington 

corporation; and DOES 1–50, inclusive,

Defendants.

No. 1:15-cv-01738-DAD-JLT

AMENDED ORDER REGARDING THE

CLOSING OF THE CASE

(Doc. Nos. 24 and 25)

On May 19, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing the action in its entirety 

and with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. (Doc. No. 24.) The parties 

specifically stipulated to dismissal of plaintiff’s individual claims with prejudice, and to dismissal 

of the class claims without prejudice. (Id.) On May 20, 2016, an order issued closing the case “in 

light of the voluntary dismissal with prejudice filed and properly signed pursuant to Rule 41.” 

(Doc. No. 25.) The court now clarifies that, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, plaintiff’s 

individual claims have been dismissed with prejudice and the class claims have been dismissed 

without prejudice, and without an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to any party. The Clerk of 

/////

/////

Case 1:15-cv-01738-DAD-JLT Document 26 Filed 05/26/16 Page 1 of 2
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

the Court was properly directed to close the case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. 

City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 25, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01738-DAD-JLT Document 26 Filed 05/26/16 Page 2 of 2