Lesnik v.Eisenmann SE

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 11, 20215:16-cv-01120California5,709 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. Case No. 16-CV-01120-LHK

GREGOR LESNIK; STJEPAN PAPES,

13 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART MOTION TO

14 v. COMPEL ENFORCEMENT OF

SETTLEMENT

15 EISENMANN SE, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 Plaintiffs Gregor Lesnik and Stjepan Papes (“Plaintiffs”) bring this motion to compel enforcement of a settlement agreement and for sanctions against settling defendants Eisenmann Corporation, Eisenmann SE, Eisenmann Anlagenbau Verwaltung GmbH, and Eisenmann Anlagenbau GmbH & Co. KG. ECF No. 532 (“Mot.”). Having considered the parties’ briefing, the relevant law, and the record in this case, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiffs’ motion to compel enforcement of settlement and DENIES Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions. I. BACKGROUND A. Pre-Settlement Background 27 1 Defendant Eisenmann Corporation is a manufacturer of specialized paint shop equipment. See Third Amended Complaint,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.