Alt+left-arrow to return from a link

 

Full-text: December 2 2003
Deportation/exile of the Chagos Islanders

United States District Court for the District of Columbia

	)
Olivier Bancoult, et al.,	)
Plaintiffs,	)
)
v.	)
)
Robert S. Mcnamara, et al.,	)
Defendants.	)
	)

Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(A)(2)

Plaintiffs respectfully move the Court for an order dismissing the above-entitled action as to Defendants Halliburton Company (“Halliburton”) and Brown & Root, Inc. (“Brown & Root”). Counsel for both parties agree that the dismissal should be awarded with prejudice and without costs.

Plaintiffs respectively request, without opposition, the dismissal of the above-entitled action as to Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root for the following reasons:

1.  Plaintiffs move the Court in good faith to dismiss claims against Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root.

2.  Recent events occurring in parallel litigation in the United Kingdom have led class representatives and attorneys for the class in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Mauritius to alter the focus of their litigation to concentrate on the responsibility of governmental parties. {p.2}

3.  The dismissal of claims against Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root is in Plaintiffs’ best interests. Dismissal will not unjustly impact class members and is not a result of collusion of the parties or their attorneys. Furthermore, dismissal will not prejudice absent class members. Proposed class representatives have all been consulted and have agreed that dismissal is the best course of action at this time.

Plaintiffs further request, and Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root agree, that this dismissal shall have no effect on Plaintiffs’ outstanding claims in the above-entitled action against Defendant United States Government and the individual United States Defendants.

For the reasons stated above, and in the interests of judicial efficiency, Plaintiffs respectfully move the Court to grant this unopposed motion to dismiss claims against Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root with prejudice and without costs or other conditions.

Dated: December 2, 2003.

______________________

{Case caption, omitted}

Proposed Order Dismissing Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(A)(2)

Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Defendants Halliburton Company (“Halliburton”) and Brown & Root, Inc. (“Brown & Root”), it is hereby:

Ordered that Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root should be, and hereby is Granted; and it is further

Ordered that the complaint in the above-entitled action be dismissed with prejudice as to Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root, with each party responsible for its own costs.

It is so Ordered.

Dated this______day of____________, 2003.

______________________

{Case caption, omitted}

Certificate of Service

I, Christine Parsadaian, hereby certify that on this 2nd day of December, 2003, I served by first-class mail, postage pre-paid, a true copy of Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Defendants Halliburton and Brown & Root Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(A)(2) on counsel for Defendants listed below:

Scott Atlas
Vinson & Elkins
2300 First City Tower
1001 Fannin St.
Houston, TX 77002-6760

Elaine Marzetta Lacy
U.S. Department of Justice
Torts Branch, Civil Division
P.O. Box 888
Washington, DC. 20044

Richard Montague
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division
1425 New York Ave., NW
Suite 8122
Washington, D.C. 20005

 

This document is not copyrighted and may be freely copied.

Charles Judson Harwood Jr.

Posted Jan. 20 2004. Updated Jan. 29 2005.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/bancoult-d103.html