Ruf v. Raging Waters San Jose

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Ruf v. Raging Waters San Jose

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 BONNIE RUF, Case NO: 5:22-cv-07458 NC Plaintiff, ORDER OF CONDITIONAL 10 y DISMISSAL 11 Re: ECF 33 12 RAGING WATERS SAN JOSE, and others, Defendants. 13

2 15 The Court having been notified of the settlement of this action, and it appearing that

& 16 || no issue remains for the Court’s determination, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT this 5 17 || action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of the

18 || Court is directed to administratively close this case. Any party may move to reopen the 19 || case, provided that such motion is filed within 75 days. All scheduled dates are 20 || VACATED. 21 The Court retains jurisdiction over this case for 75 days. See Kokkonen v. Guardian 22 || Life Ins. Co. of Am.,

511 U.S. 375, 381

(1994). 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 || Dated: September 7, 2023 he —j7 NATHANAEL M. COUSINS 26 United States Magistrate Judge 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown