ALO, LLC v. Italic, Inc.

United States District Court for the Central District of California

ALO, LLC v. Italic, Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-00567-SSS-RAO Document 39 Filed 02/27/23 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:303 Andrew P. Holland (State Bar No. 224737) 1 [email protected] Aaron Wainscoat (State Bar No. 218339) 2 [email protected] 3 Melissa Zonne (State Bar No. 301581) JS-6 [email protected] THOITS LAW 4 A Professional Corporation 400 Main Street, Suite 250 5 Los Altos, California 94022 Telephone: (650) 327-4200 6 Facsimile: (650) 325-5572 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff 8 ALO, LLC David H. Bernstein (State Bar No. 336551) 9 DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP 650 California Street 10 San Francisco, CA 94108 11 [email protected] Matthew A. Homyk (pro hac vice) 12 BLANK ROME LLP 13 130 N. 18th Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 14 Telephone: (215) 569-5360 [email protected] 15 Attorneys for Defendant 16 ITALIC, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL 17 DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 ALO, LLC, a California limited liability Case No. 2:22-CV-00567-SSS-RAOx 20 company, STIPULATED JUDGMENT AND 21 Plaintiff, ORDER 22 v. 23 ITALIC, INC., a Delaware corporation, 24 Defendants. 25 26 Plaintiff ALO, LLC (“ALO”) and Defendant ITALIC, INC. (“Italic”) hereby 27 represent to the Court that they have agreed to a compromise and settlement of this 28 -1- STIPULATED ORDER AND CONSENT JUDGMENT Case 2:22-cv-00567-SSS-RAO Document 39 Filed 02/27/23 Page 2of3 Page ID #:304

Action and all claims, defenses and counterclaims, including all claims that were

5 brought in this Action.

3 WHEREFORE, with the consent of the parties, through their undersigned 4 attorneys, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:

; 1. The Court has and shall continue to retain jurisdiction over the parties and

‘ subject matter of this Action.

4 2. The parties have entered into a written Confidential Settlement Agreement, effective February 16, 2023 (“Settlement Agreement’), that sets forth the rights and obligations of ALO and Italic and the parties expressly agree that

10 this Court will retain ancillary jurisdiction over this matter in law and equity for

□□ purposes of enforcing and/or adjudicating any violation of the parties’ Settlement

Agreement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co.,

511 U.S. 375, 381-2

(1994). Any 3 such matters shall be raised by noticed motion.

4 3. The parties will comply with their obligations as set forth in

15 the Settlement Agreement. 16 4. Subject to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, ALO’s Complaint is

"7 dismissed with prejudice. ig 5. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ 19 fees. SO STIPULATED.

°° Dated: 2/17/2023, 2023 Act 21 ———— By: [é NO LAW 23 Andrew P. Holland 44 4 tne for Plaintiff 25 26 27 28

2. STIPULATED ORDER AND CONSENT JUDGMENT

Case 2:22-cv-00567-SSS-RAO Document 39 Filed 02/27/23 Page3of3 Page ID #:305

1 | Dated: February 17 , 2023 [or (4 > By: DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP 3 David H. Bernstein 4 Attorneys for Defendant 5 Italic, Inc. 7 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: 10 | Dated: February 27, 2023 Honorable Sunshiyf#S. Sykes 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3- STIPULATED ORDER AND CONSENT JUDGMENT

Reference

Status
Unknown