Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04221/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04221-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

DAVID M. STERNBERG (SBN 96107)

ROBERT A. MILLER (SBN 208616)

JACOB M. BARLEV (SBN 235439)

DAVID M. STERNBERG & ASSOCIATES

Attorneys at Law

540 Lennon Lane

Walnut Creek, CA 94598

Telephone: (925) 946-1400

Facsimile: (925) 932-6986

Attorneys for Plaintiff

HARJINDER SINGH BRAICH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

HARJINDER SINGH BRAICH,

Plaintiff,

v.

PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION, a

New Jersey corporation doing business in

California, and all persons unknown,

claiming any legal or equitable right, title,

estate, lien, or interest in the property

described in this complaint adverse to

Plaintiff’s title thereto, and DOES 1

through 30, inclusive,

Defendants.

________________________________/

Case No. 3:14-cv-04221-DMR

ORDER ON STIPULATION TO DISMISS

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)

Removed from the Superior Court for the State

of California in and for the County of Alameda

Case No. RG 14715378

Removal Filed: 09/18/14

State Court Action Filed: 02/26/14

ORDER

Based on the Stipulation to Dismiss First Amended Complaint entered into by and between 

Plaintiff HARJINDER SINGH BRAICH (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant PHH MORTGAGE

CORPORATION (“PHH Mortgage”)(the “Stipulation”) and for good cause shown:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Stipulation is Approved

///

Case 3:14-cv-04221-RS Document 36 Filed 04/16/15 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

2. The First Amended Complaint is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule

41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, with each party to bear their

own attorneys’ fees and costs.

3. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over all matters relating to the interpretation,

administration, implementation, effectuation and enforcement of this Order.

***END OF ORDER***

Dated: April 16, 2015 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:14-cv-04221-RS Document 36 Filed 04/16/15 Page 2 of 2