Brooks v. Olsen et al
ORDER granting Plaintiff's 8 Motion to Drop his Claim; this case is dismissed without prejudice; the Clerk must enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 9/30/13.(REW)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Donimic T. Brooks,
No. CV 13-841-PHX-RCB (BSB)
M. Olsen, et al.,
On April 25, 2013, Plaintiff Donimic T. Brooks, who is confined in the
Corrections Corporation of America’s Saguaro Correctional Center in Eloy, Arizona,
filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In a May 6, 2013
Order, the Court noted that Plaintiff had not paid the filing fee or filed an Application to
Proceed In Forma Pauperis. The Court gave Plaintiff 30 days to pay the filing fee or file
an Application to Proceed.
On May 17, 2013, Plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In
an August 28, 2013 Order, the Court granted the Application to Proceed and dismissed
the Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Court
gave Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint that cured the deficiencies identified
in the Order.
On September 19, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Drop his Claim (Doc. 8),
seeking to “drop [his] claim/suit of the above case.” Under Rule 41(a) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may dismiss an action without an order of the court by
filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service of an answer or a motion for
summary judgment. The right to voluntarily dismiss an action under these circumstances
is absolute. Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077
(9th Cir. 1999). The Court will therefore grant Plaintiff’s Motion to Drop his Claim.
IT IS ORDERED:
Plaintiff’s Motion to Drop his Claim (Doc. 8) is granted.
This case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court must enter
DATED this 30th day of September, 2013.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?