Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-06060/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-06060-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Moore Law Group
Defendant
Rohit Nannegari
Plaintiff

Document Text:

Nannegari v. The Moore Law Group, APC Case No. 3:16-cv-6060

Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice Page 1

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

J. Erik Heath, Esq. (SBN 304683) 

100 Bush Street, Suite 1800 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone Number: (415) 391-2391 

Facsimile: (415) 449-6556 

Email Address: erik@heathlegal.com

Attorney for Plaintiff 

ROHIT NANNEGARI 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ROHIT NANNEGARI,

Plaintiff, 

v.

THE MOORE LAW GROUP, A PROF. 

CORP.,

Defendant. 

Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-6060-MMC 

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

COME NOW Plaintiff ROHIT NANNEGARI and Defendant THE MOORE LAW 

GROUP, A PROF. CORP., by and through the undersigned counsel of record, and file this 

Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(2). It is agreed 

that each party will bear its own costs and attorney’s fees. 

Dated: 1/9/2017 J. ERIK HEATH, ATTORNEY AT LAW

 By: /s/ Jon Erik Heath 

 J. Erik Heath

 Attorney for Plaintiff

ROHIT NANNEGARI

 // 

// 

Case 3:16-cv-06060-MMC Document 19 Filed 01/09/17 Page 1 of 3
Nannegari v. The Moore Law Group, APC Case No. 3:16-cv-6060

Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice Page 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

Dated: 1/9/2017 THE MOORE LAW GROUP, A.P.C. 

 By: /s/ Ramin Mahdavi 

 Ramin Mahdavi

 Attorney for Defendant

THE MOORE LAW GROUP, A.P.C.

Pursuant to L.R. 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I, J. Erik Heath, attest that concurrence in 

the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. I declare under 

penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and 

correct. Executed this 9th day of January, 2017, at San Francisco.

 By: /s/ Jon Erik Heath 

 J. Erik Heath

Case 3:16-cv-06060-MMC Document 19 Filed 01/09/17 Page 2 of 3
Nannegari v. The Moore Law Group, APC Case No. 3:16-cv-6060

[Proposed] Order on Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice Page 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

ORDER

 Having read the foregoing stipulation and agreement of the parties, and for good cause 

appearing, the Court hereby orders: 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED THAT, 

 The above action is dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear its own costs and 

attorney’s fees. 

Dated: ______________ _____________________________ 

 Hon. Maxine M. Chesney 

 U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 

January 9, 2017 _____________________________

Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

U S DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:16-cv-06060-MMC Document 19 Filed 01/09/17 Page 3 of 3