Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00117/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00117-12/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sean Gahan
Counter Claimant
Alison Haugan
Counter Defendant
Jon Haugan
Counter Defendant
Optistreams, Inc.
Counter Defendant

Document Text:

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

{6489/002/00183181.DOC} 1

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE AND ORDER THEREON (FRCP 41)

SAGASER, JONES & HAHESY

2445 Capitol Street, 2nd Floor

Post Office Box 1632

Fresno, California 93717-1632

Telephone: (559) 233-4800

Facsimile: (559) 233-9330

Howard A. Sagaser #072492

Melody A. Hawkins #226522

Attorneys for: Defendant/Counter-Claimant Sean Gahan 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - FRESNO DIVISION

OPTISTREAMS, INC.

Plaintiff,

v.

SEAN GAHAN and DOES 1-25

Defendants.

Case No. 05 CV-00117 REC SMS

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL

WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER

THEREON (FRCP 41)

SEAN GAHAN

Counter-Claimant

v.

OPTISTREAMS, INC., JON HAUGAN,

an individual, and ALISON HAUGAN, an

individual

Counter-Defendants.

Plaintiff Optistreams, Inc., Cross-Defendants Jon Haugen and Allison Haugen,

and Defendant/Counter-Claimant Sean Gahan, by and through their respective attorneys of 

///

///

///

///

Case 1:05-cv-00117-AWI -SMS Document 120 Filed 07/27/06 Page 1 of 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

{6489/002/00183181.DOC} 2

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE AND ORDER THEREON (FRCP 41)

record, hereby STIPULATE and AGREE that the above-referenced action shall be dismissed

with prejudice.

DATED: July ____, 2006.

SAGASER, JONES & HAHESY

By: ___________________________________

Howard A. Sagaser, Attorneys for

Defendant/Counter-Claimant Sean Gahan

DATED: July ____, 2006 TRIAL & TECHNOLOGY LAW GROUP

By: __________________________________

Andrew Kislik, Attorneys for 

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendants Optistreams,

Inc., Jon Haugen, and Alison Haugen

ORDER

The parties seek dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) by filing a

notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer

or of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first occurs, or (ii) by filing a

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action.

Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is

without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication

upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court of

the United States or of any state an action based on or including the same claim.

Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an

answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties who have

Case 1:05-cv-00117-AWI -SMS Document 120 Filed 07/27/06 Page 2 of 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

{6489/002/00183181.DOC} 3

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE AND ORDER THEREON (FRCP 41)

appeared, although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. Carter v. Beverly Hills

Sav. & Loan Asso., 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470,

1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986). Because Plaintiff has filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice

as to all parties under Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) that is signed by all parties who have made an

appearance, this case has terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d at

466. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED and the Clerk of

the Court is DIRECTED to close this case in light of the parties’ filed and signed Rule

41(a)(1)(ii) Stipulation For Dismissal With Prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00117-AWI -SMS Document 120 Filed 07/27/06 Page 3 of 3