From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ebrat v. Bayer Healthcare LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 3, 2011
Case No. C 11-02807 EMC (N.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. C 11-02807 EMC

11-03-2011

SUMAIRA EBRAT, Plaintiff, v. BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC; BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS INC. and DOES 1-100, Defendants. BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC, Counterclaimant, v. SUMAIRA EBRAT, Counter-defendant.

LAW OFFICE OF JEROME SCHREIBSTEIN Jerome Schreibstein Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC, and Defendant BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS INC. MAYALL HURLEY KNUTSEN SMITH & GREEN Mark Adams Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant SUMAIRA EBRAT


JEROME SCHREIBSTEIN (SBN: 154051)

LAW OFFICE OF JEROME SCHREIBSTEIN

Embarcadero Center West

Attorneys for Defendant & Counterclaimant

BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC and Defendant BAYER

HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS INC.

MARK ADAMS, ESQ. (SBN: 78706)

MAYALL HURLEY KNUTSEN SMITH & GREEN

Attorneys for Plaintiff & Counterdefendant

SUMAIRA EBRAT

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE:

DISMISSAL OF KATHY TESDALL,

BAYER PHARMACEUTICALS INC.

Date: October 25, 2011

Time: 2:30 p.m.

Place: Courtroom 5, 17th Floor

STIPULATION

The parties, defendant & counterclaimant, Bayer HealthCare LLC, and defendant Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. (collectively, at times, the "Bayer Entities"), on the one hand, and plaintiff & counterdefendant, Sumaira Ebrat ("Ebrat"), on the other hand, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, in her Complaint, Ebrat identified Kathy Tesdall as a party in the body of the pleading, though she did not name Ms. Tesdall in the Summons or caption of the Complaint;

WHEREAS, Ebrat has determined that she will not prosecute the within action against Ms. Tesdall and she will stipulate to a dismissal of the action without prejudice as to Ms. Tesdall;

WHEREAS, Ebrat named as a defendant Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. in the Complaint;

WHEREAS, the Bayer Entities represent that Ebrat was never an employee of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. and that Ebrat was an employee of and terminated by Bayer HealthCare LLC;

WHEREAS, based on these representations, Ebrat has determined to dismiss without prejudice the Complaint against Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.; and

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that no party shall be entitled to its fees or costs by virtue of the above-described dismissals;

WHEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate to the dismissal without prejudice of Kathy Tesdall and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. with a mutual waiver of fees and costs.

IT IS SO AGREED.

LAW OFFICE OF JEROME SCHREIBSTEIN

Jerome Schreibstein

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant

BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC, and Defendant

BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS

INC.

MAYALL HURLEY KNUTSEN SMITH &

GREEN

Mark Adams

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant

SUMAIRA EBRAT

ORDER

BASED ON THE FOREGOING STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES AND GOOD CAUSE OTHERWISE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that Kathy Tesdall and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. are dismissed without prejudice, with a mutual waiver of fees and costs.

Judge Edward M. Chen

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ebrat v. Bayer Healthcare LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 3, 2011
Case No. C 11-02807 EMC (N.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)
Case details for

Ebrat v. Bayer Healthcare LLC

Case Details

Full title:SUMAIRA EBRAT, Plaintiff, v. BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC; BAYER HEALTHCARE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 3, 2011

Citations

Case No. C 11-02807 EMC (N.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)