1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 LUIS SAMANO, No. 1:21-cv-01692-SKO 9 Plaintiff, 10 v. ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE 11 LVNV FUNDING, LLC, (Doc. 49) 12 Defendant. 13 14 15 On June 20, 2023, the parties filed a joint stipulation dismissing the action with prejudice.1 16 (Doc. 49.) In light of the parties’ stipulation, this action has been terminated, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 17 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose,

(9th Cir. 1997), and has been 18 dismissed with prejudice. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20

21 Dated: June 21, 2023 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22

23

24 25 1 The parties’ stipulation also provided that the Court “retain ancillary jurisdiction for enforcement of the Settlement 26 Agreement between the Parties in its Order.” (See Doc. 49 at 2.) The Court in its discretion declines to adopt this portion of the stipulation. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America,

(1994); Camacho v. 27 City of San Luis,

(9th Cir. 2009); California Sportfishing Prot. All. v. Agric. Mgmt. & Prod. Co., Inc., No. 2:14-cv-02328-KJM-AC,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2016) (noting that “the court in 28 its discretion typically declines to maintain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement.”).