Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-01049/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-01049-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

- 1 – 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Order Granting Joint Motion to Dismiss 

1041824v1 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

VANCE HILDERMAN, an individual; 

HIGHRELY, INC., a Delaware corporation, 

 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

ENEA TEKSCI, INC. dba ENEA 

EMBEDDED TECHNOLOGY, 

Defendants. 

AND RELATED COUNTER CLAIMS

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Case No. 05CV1049-BTM (AJB) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS ENTIRE 

ACTION WITH RESERVATION OF 

JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE 

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 

Judge: Hon. Barry Ted Moskowitz 

The parties have jointly requested that the Court dismiss the entire action with prejudice, 

while reserving jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties. The 

parties state that the entire case has been settled pursuant to a Settlement Agreement and Mutual 

Release with an effective date of June 18, 2010 (“Settlement Agreement”). Parties to an action 

may request that the court retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement. See Hagestad v. 

Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430 (9th Cir. 1995). Since it would be economical for this Court to retain 

jurisdiction so that a breach of the Settlement Agreement would not require a new litigation, the 

Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement. All parties are ordered to 

comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

Case 3:05-cv-01049-BTM-AJB Document 175 Filed 06/28/10 Page 1 of 2
 - 2 – 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Order Granting Joint Motion to Dismiss 

1041824v1 

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

Upon the Agreement of all parties, the entire action is dismissed with prejudice pursuant 

to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 (a)(2). Each party shall pay its own costs and attorneys fees. 

SO ORDERED. 

DATED: June 28, 2010 ________________________ 

Hon. Barry Ted Moskowitz 

Case 3:05-cv-01049-BTM-AJB Document 175 Filed 06/28/10 Page 2 of 2