Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-03332/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-03332-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

M URPHY 

AUSTIN 

ADAMS SCHOENFELD LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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

680.003-303141.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER OF ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT, C-04-3332 SBA

CARY M. ADAMS, SBN 103359

GEOFFREY A. GOODMAN, SBN 073355

RANDALL J. HAKES, SBN 233548

MURPHY AUSTIN ADAMS SCHOENFELD LLP

1000 G Street, Third Floor (95814)

Post Office Box 1319

Sacramento, California 95812-1319

Telephone: (916) 446-2300

Facsimile: (916) 503-4000

Email: cadams@murphyaustin.com

Email: ggoodman@murphyaustin.com

Email: rhakes@murphyaustin.com

Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants

THE COUNTY OF MARIN AND THE COUNTY 

OF TUOLUMNE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

GLADWELL GOVERNMENTAL 

SERVICES, INC., a California 

corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF MARIN, etc., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C-04-3332 SBA

 ORDER OF ENTRY OF FINAL

JUDGMENT

COUNTY OF MARIN, a legal subdivision 

of the State of California; COUNTY OF 

TUOLUMNE, a legal subdivision of the 

State of California,

Counterclaimants,

v.

GLADWELL GOVERNMENTAL 

SERVICES, INC., a California 

corporation, and DIANE GLADWELL, in 

her individual capacity,

Counterdefendants.

 

Case 4:04-cv-03332-SBA Document 61 Filed 10/28/05 Page 1 of 2
M URPHY 

AUSTIN 

ADAMS SCHOENFELD LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

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 - 680.003-303141.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING CASE C-04-3332 SBA

Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendants in or about August of 2004. Defendants 

answered the complaint, filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure and asserted nine counterclaims of their own. On March 7, 2005, the Court 

granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and ordered the complaint dismissed for lack of 

standing. On October 18, 2005, the Court denied defendants’ motion for partial summary 

judgment and ordered defendant/counterclaimants’ first, fourth and fifth counterclaims be 

dismissed as moot under its March 7, 2005 order. On October 24, 2005, the counterclaimants and 

counterdefendants stipulated to a voluntary dismissal of the remaining counterclaims (the second, 

third, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth counterclaims) and agreed that the dismissal of all 

counterclaims are without prejudice. Accordingly, all of the claims asserted by the parties have 

been decided by this Court or voluntarily dismissed. There remains no further claims for this 

court to decide. 

THEREFORE, THIS COURT HEREBY ORDERS this matter finally adjudicated and that 

an entry of final judgment be entered on the docket reflecting as much. 

DATE: 10/28/05

SANDRA B. ARMSTRONG

JUDGE FOR THE UNITED STATES 

DISTRICT COURT, NOTHERN DISTRICT OF 

CALIFORNIA

Case 4:04-cv-03332-SBA Document 61 Filed 10/28/05 Page 2 of 2