In Re Quaker Oats Labeling Litigation, No. 5:2010cv00502 - Document 212 (N.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 7/29/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/29/2014)

Download PDF
In Re Quaker Oats Labeling Litigation Doc. 212 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 15 IN RE QUAKER OATS LABELING 16 LITIGATION 17 18 Case No. 5:10-cv-00502 RS CLASS ACTION [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT Judge: Hon. Richard Seeborg 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dockets.Justia.com 1 29th 4 July IT IS on this _____ day of ___________, 201_, HEREBY ADJUDGED AND 2 DECREED PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RULE 58 3 THAT: 4 1. The settlement of In re Quaker Oats Labeling Litigation, No. 5:10-00502 5 RS, pending in the United States District Court, Northern District of California (the 6 “Litigation”), on the terms set forth in the Parties’ Settlement Agreement, with exhibits, 7 and definitions included therein, dated December 20, 2013, and filed with this Court on 8 December 23, 2013, is finally approved. 9 2. Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 58”), 10 the Court hereby approves the form of judgment and sets forth the judgment in this 11 separate document, to be entered into the civil docket, pursuant to Rule 79(a). 12 3. The claims in this Litigation are dismissed on the merits and with prejudice 13 pursuant to the terms set forth in the Parties’ Settlement Agreement and in the Court’s 14 Final Order Approving Class Action Settlement. 15 4. The Court will retain continuing jurisdiction over the Parties and the 16 Litigation for the reasons and purposes set forth in the Final Order Approving Class 17 Action Settlement, without affecting the finality of this Final Judgment. 18 DATED: _________________ 7/29/14 19 20 _______________________________ The Honorable Richard Seeborg UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.