Koga-Smith v. MetLife et al, No. 3:2012cv04050 - Document 70 (N.D. Cal. 2013)
Court Description: ORDER re Final Judgment. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/5/2013. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2013)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Koga-Smith v. MetLife et al Doc. 70 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 NAOMI KOGA-SMITH, 9 Plaintiff, v. 11 For the Northern District of California 10 United States District Court No. C-12-4050 EMC METLIFE, et al., 12 13 ORDER RE FINAL JUDGMENT Defendants. ___________________________________/ 14 15 Previously, the Court issued an order granting summary judgment in favor of Ms. Carter. 16 See Docket No. 54 (Order at 5). The Court, however, declined to order a final judgment at that time 17 because Ms. Carter had suggested that she might want to file crossclaims or counterclaims. 18 Accordingly, the Court gave Ms. Carter a specific time period within which to file any crossclaim or 19 counterclaim. See Docket No. 54 (Order at 5-6). 20 Ms. Carter has now submitted a declaration stating that she “has researched the law and 21 concluded that filing . . . claims as part of this case would not be prudent.” Docket No. 69 (Carter 22 Decl. at 1). She affirmatively states that “she will not be filing crossclaims against MetLife as part 23 of this case” and that “any claims against [Ms. Koga-Smith] are more properly pursued in a state 24 court and not part of this case.” Docket No. 69 (Carter ¶¶ 1, 2). Ms. Carter concludes by asking the 25 Court to enter a final judgment in the case. 26 Because Ms. Carter has now expressly declined to add any crossclaims or counterclaims to 27 this case, the Court agrees that a final judgment is proper. Ms. Koga-Smith’s claims have been 28 disposed of in their entirety. Accordingly, the Court directs the Clerk of the Court to enter a Dockets.Justia.com 1 final judgment in this case in accordance with its summary judgment order of March 12, 2013. 2 See Docket No. 54 (order). The Clerk of the Court is also directed to close the file in this case.1 3 The Court notes that, although it is directing entry of a final judgment and the closure of the 4 file, Ms. Carter and MetLife are still expected to file a joint letter on April 10, 2013, regarding the 5 status of the wire transfer. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 Dated: April 5, 2013 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 27 28 As before, Ms. Carter has asked for “a ruling with prejudice,” Docket No. 69 (Carter Decl. ¶ 4), but, as the Court has previously indicated, “[t]he extent to which this Court’s ruling on the merits in this case will have any res judicata effect in a subsequent case will be for the court in the subsequent case to decide.” Docket No. 61 (Order at 3). 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.
