UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 6, 2012
PIEDMONT PLASTICS, INC., A CORPORATION; REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS, A BUSINESS ENTITY, FORM UNKNOWN AND DOES 1-20, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jeffrey S. White United States District Judge
Jeremy Pasternak, Esq. (SBN: 181618) Anthony Oceguera, Esq. (SBN: 259117) 2 LAW OFFICES OF JEREMY PASTERNAK 445 Bush Street, 6th 3 Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 4 Telephone: (415) 693-0300 Facsimile: (415) 693-0393 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff 6 RICHARD RUY 7 Douglas E. Dexter (State Bar No. 115868) firstname.lastname@example.org 8 Diego Acevedo (State Bar No. 244693) Farella Braun Martel LLP 9 235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 10 Telephone: (415) 954-4400 Facsimile: (415) 954-4480 11 Attorneys for Defendant 12 PIEDMONT PLASTICS, INC. and REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS, LLC 13 14
DRAFT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISMISSAL OF PIEDMONT PLASTICS, INC.
The parties, Plaintiff RICHARD RUY and Defendants PIEDMONT PLASTICS, INC. 25 and REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS, LLC, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as 26 follows: 27 28
WHEREAS, Plaintiff has brought this action relating to his former employment against 2 corporate entities PIEDMONT PLASTICS, and REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS; and, 3
WHEREAS, PIEDMONT PLASTICS, and REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS were each 4 named as Defendants in this action based on documents allegedly received by Plaintiff from his 5 employer during his employment making reference to said entities; and 6
WHEREAS, Defendants PIEDMONT PLASTICS, and REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS 7 have represented and do represent that REGAL PIEDMONT PLASTICS is the sole true and 8 correct identity of the former employer of Plaintiff RICHARD RUY with regards to Plaintiff's 9 claims in this matter; and 10
WHEREAS, the parties agree that PIEDMONT PLASTICS, should be dismissed in order 11 to simplify the pleadings and serve the interests of judicial economy; and, 12
WHEREAS, Said dismissal shall be without prejudice,
WHEREAS, the parties agree that if the Court determines that PIEDMONT PLASTICS, 14 should be reintroduced into the case (for example, based on a contention by Plaintiff that 15
PIEDMONT PLASTICS is an alter ego or successor-in-interest, which is not conceded by this 16 stipulation), such reintroduction shall relate back to the time of the filing of the original 17 complaint in this matter for the purposes of the calculation of any applicable statutes of 18 limitation; 19
THEREFORE, the parties hereby request that Defendant PIEDMONT PLASTICS, INC. 20 be dismissed from this action. 21 22
IS HEREBY DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FROM THIS ACTION. 9
Hon. Donna M. Ryu
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.