1 SODW LEW BRANDON, JR., ESQ. 2 Nevada Bar No. 5880 3 ANDREW GUZIK, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 12758 4 || HOMERO GONZALEZ, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 15231 5 BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM + 6 139 East Warm Springs Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 7 (702) 380-0007 = (702) 380-2964— facsimile Sau 8 || [email protected] = 9 «|| @[email protected] = 2 3 [email protected] = % 10 || Attorneys for Defendant, THE VONS COMPANIES, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 13 = JAN E. BISHOP, individually, 14 cr] iE Plaintiff, CASE NO.: 2:19-cv-02029-RFB-BNW > =. 16 VS. & — 17 || THE VONS COMPANIES, INC., a 7, Nevada Foreign Corporation; DOE 6 4 18 || MANAGER; DOES I through XX; and 19 ROE CORPORATIONS I through XX; inclusive, 20 Defendants. 21 22 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO DISMISS DEFENDANT, THE VONS COMPANIE INC., WITH PREJUDICE LEAVING NO REMAINING PARTIES 23 34 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED TO by LEW BRANDON, JR., ES'

95 || ANDREW GUZIK, ESQ., and HOMERO GONZALEZ, ESQ., of BRANDON | SMERB! 26 || LAW FIRM, on behalf of Defendant, THE VONS COMPANIES, INC., and Plaintiff, JAN 27 || BISHOP, by and through GLENN A. PATERNOSTER, ESQ., and POOJA KUMAR, ESQ., 28 PATERNOSTER LAW GROUP, LLC, as follows:

Jan E. Bishop v The Vons Companies, Inc., et 5 Case No. 2:19-cv-02029-RFB-BN 3 That Defendant, THE VONS COMPANIES, INC., be dismissed, with prejudice from 1 4 above-entitled matter, leaving no remaining parties. Each party to bear their own fees and cos 2 DATED this Wik day of June, 2021. DATED this Way of June, 2021. BRANDON | SMERBER LAW PATERNOSTER LAW GROUP a 7 FIBA n ‘ oe aK Ox, 6 Ul /s/aevt-Brandan, Jr. Esq. CARY A 2A i Mh WSATD = LEW BRANDON, JR., ESQ. GLENN A. PATERNOSTER, ESQ. < 10 Nevada Bar No. 5880 Nevada Bar No. 5452 ANDREW GUZIK, ESQ. POOJA KUMAR, ESQ. 11 || Nevada Bar No. 12758 Nevada Bar No. 12988 D HOMERO GONZALEZ, ESQ.

" Street, Suite 300 Nevada Bar No. 15231 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 13 139 East Warm Springs 702-654-1111 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Facsimile — 702-522-1522 14 (702) 380-0007 [email protected] 7 (702) 380-2964— facsimile [email protected] lL [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff, > => 16 [email protected] JAN E. BISHOP [email protected] —F 17 Attorneys for Defendant, 7, 7 THE VONS COMPANIES, INC. O- 19 M/ 20 □□ at il 22 HI 23

24 5 HI 26 // 27 Wi 28

1 Jan E. Bishop v The Vons Companies, Inc., et Case No. 2:19-cv-02029-RFB-Bi 3 IT IS SO ORDERED that Defendant, THE VONS COMPANIES, INC., be dismiss 4 with prejudice from the above-entitled matter, leaving no remaining parties. Each party to b > || their own fees and costs. = 6 a 3 a DATED this 4th dayof _ June , 2021.

S82 10 RICHA LWARE, I United States District Court = 12 : Respectfully submitted by: 13 BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM 14 /s/ A Brandon, Jr., Esq. —? = = 16 || LEW BRANDON, JR., ESQ. NT & Nevada Bar No. 5880 —' 17 || ANDREW GUZIK, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 12758 || HOMERO GONZALEZ, ESQ. 19 || Nevada Bar No. 15231 139 East Warm Springs 20 || Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (702) 380-0007 21 |! (702) 380-2964~ facsimile ro 9) || [email protected] a.guzik(@bsnv.law 23 || [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant, 24 || THE VONS COMPANIES, INC. 25 26 27 28