United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 2021

Garcia v. Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc.

Garcia v. Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc.
United States District Court for the Northern District of California · Decided September 21, 2021
Garcia v. Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

Ernest H. Eubanks, Jr. (Pro Hac Vice) [email protected] Florida Bar No. 0612091 Steven I. Klein (Pro Hac Vice) [email protected] Florida Bar. No. 0675245 Samantha C. Duke (Pro Hac Vice) [email protected] Florida Bar No. 091403 RUMBERGER, KIRK & CALDWELL, P.A.

300 South Orange Avenue, Suite 1400 Orlando, Florida 32801 Telephone: (407) 872-7300 Facsimile: (407) 841-2133

Abirami Gnanadesigan SBN 263375 [email protected] DYKEMA GOSSETT LLP South Grand Avenue, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 457-1800 Facsimile: (213) 457-1850 John M. Thomas SBN 266842 [email protected] Krista L. Lenart [email protected] DYKEMA GOSSETT LLP 2723 South State Street, Suite 400 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 Telephone: (734) 214-7660 Facsimile: (734) 214-7696

Attorneys for Defendant, HARLEY-DAVIDSON MOTOR COMPANY GROUP, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

RONALD GARCIA and MICHAEL Case No. 3:19-cv-02054 JCS HARRISON, Class Action Plaintiffs, JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE vs. HARLEY-DAVIDSON MOTOR Complaint Filed: April 16, 2019 COMPANY GROUP, LLC, Trial Date: None Set Judge: Magistrate Joseph C. Spero Defendant. Date: June 28, 2019 Ctrm: G, 15th Floor

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Plaintiffs, Ronald Garcia and Michael Harrison and Defendant, Harley-Davidson Motor Company Group, LLC, by and through the undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate that this action is dismissed with prejudice.

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), this stipulation is effective immediately and no court order is required. Urista v. Midland Funding, LLC, No. 1:21-cv-00429-, 2021 U.S. 17 Dist. LEXIS 155104, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2021) (“Case law concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval.”); see also Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) is effective on filing) Respectfully submitted, Dated: September 20, 2021 /s/ Nicholas W. Armstrong Nicholas W. Armstrong Attorney for Plaintiffs

/s/ Steven I. Klein Steven I. Klein Attorney for Defendant "5 DISTRIC i> xD iS > TTS 80 one Dated: September 21, 2021 ° csv YZ CA judge Joven © Yy DISTRICS

Lianan ATR 9.10 acer WINKA ATTESTATION I, Steven I. Klein, am the CM/ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this Joint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice. Pursuant to the Local Civil Rules, I hereby attest that Nicholas W. Armstrong, on whose behalf this filing is jointly submitted, has concurred in this filing.

/s/ Steven I. Klein

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (United States District Court)

I hereby certify that on September 20, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing document described as JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which will send notifications of such filing via electronic mail to all counsel of record.

By: /s/ Steven I. Klein

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.