Jones v. Coty, Inc. et al

Filing 194

ORDER, 193 Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) is construed as a motion for court order of dismissal, pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2). The motion is GRANTED as modified. All of Plf Bowen's individua l claims against Dfts Coty, Inc.; The Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co., Inc.; The Procter & Gamble Distributing, L.L.C.; Procter and Gamble Hair Care, L.L.C.; & The Procter & Gamble Company, Inc., are DISMISSED w/prejudice, w/each party to bear their own costs. The class claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Terry F. Moorer on 8/7/19. (tot)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CARRIE BOWENS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
COTY INC., et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-cv-622-TFM-B

ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice Under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 41(a) (Doc. 193, filed August 7, 2019) wherein Plaintiff Carrie Bowens and
Defendants Coty, Inc.; The Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co., Inc.; The Procter & Gamble
Distributing, L.L.C.; Procter and Gamble Hair Care, L.L.C.; and The Procter & Gamble Company,
Inc., stipulate to the dismissal of the action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). However,
for the reasons discussed below, the Court instead construes the document as a motion for a court
order of dismissal, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2).1
A request to dismiss an action requires a court order and dismissal by terms the court
considers “proper” if Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1) does not apply. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(2). Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A) allows for dismissal without a court order: (i) before the opposing party serves
either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or (ii) if the joint stipulation of dismissal is
signed by all of the parties who have appeared.

1

Since the Court construes the parties’ stipulation for dismissal as a motion pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(a)(2), the Clerk of Court may disregard the fact that the signature of Defendants’ counsel
does not indicate that it is electronically signed with permission.
Page 1 of 2

In the case at hand, while both Plaintiff Bowens and Defendants have signed the stipulation
of dismissal, there is the question as to the purported class claims brought in the complaint and
amended complaint. Moreover, the parties do not address it in their stipulation of dismissal. The
stipulated dismissal certainly resolves the individual claims between Plaintiff Bowens and
Defendants. However, as the class certification issue was never addressed, the settlement does not
(and cannot) address any purported class claims except to the extent Plaintiff Bowens can no longer
be the class representative. Thus, for clarity, the Court must ensure that there is no future confusion
on this issue.
Therefore, upon consideration of the motion (Doc. 193), it is hereby ORDERED that the
motion is GRANTED as modified.

All of Plaintiff Bowens’s individual claims against

Defendants Coty, Inc.; The Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co., Inc.; The Procter & Gamble
Distributing, L.L.C.; Procter and Gamble Hair Care, L.L.C.; and The Procter & Gamble Company,
Inc., are DISMISSED with prejudice, with each party to bear their own costs. The class claims
are DISMISSED without prejudice.
DONE and ORDERED this the 7th day of August 2019.
/s/ Terry F. Moorer
TERRY F. MOORER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2