Advocates for Individuals with Disabilities Foundation Incorporated v. Weingarten Nostat Incorporated
Filing
11
ORDER denying 10 Motion to Remand to State Court. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 8/5/2016.(DGC, nvo)
1 WO
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
Advocates for Individuals with
Disabilities Foundation, Inc.,
ORDER
9
10
11
12
No.: CV16-02423-PHX DGC
Plaintiff,
v.
Weingarten Nostat, Inc.,
Defendants.
13
14
15
Plaintiff has filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Federal Claims Without
16
Prejudice and Motion to Remand. Doc. 10. Plaintiff purports to use Federal Rule of
17
18
19
Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i) to dismiss its federal claims under the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq. (“ADA”). With the basis for this Court’s
federal question jurisdiction thus eliminated, Plaintiff asks the Court to remand this
case to state court. Id.
20
The Ninth Circuit has held that Rule 41(a)(1) “does not allow for piecemeal
21
dismissals.” Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th
22
Cir. 2005). “Instead, withdrawals of individual claims against a given defendant are
23
governed by [Rule] 15, which addresses amendments to pleadings.”
24
25
Id. (citing
Ethridge v. Harbor House Restaurant, 861 F.2d 1389 (9th Cir. 1988)); see also Gen.
Signal Corp. v. MCI Telecomms. Corp., 66 F.3d 1500, 1513 (9th Cir. 1995) (“[W]e
have held that Rule 15, not Rule 41, governs the situation when a party dismisses
26
1
some, but not all, of its claims.”) (citations omitted). Thus, “‘a plaintiff may not use
2
[Rule 41(a)(1)] to dismiss, unilaterally, a single claim from a multi-claim complaint.’”
3
Hells Canyon, 403 F.3d at 687 (quoting Ethridge, 861 F.2d at 1392). Other circuits
4
agree. See id. n.4 (collecting cases); see also S. Gensler, Federal Rules of Civil
5
Procedure, Rules and Commentary, at 1014 (Thomson Reuters 2016) (“[I]f a plaintiff
has multiple claims against a defendant and wishes to dismiss one or more – but not all
6
– of those claims, the appropriate procedural mechanism is to file an amended
7
complaint under Rule 15(a).”).1
8
The Court will disregard Plaintiff’s attempted dismissal of its ADA claim and
9
deny its motion to remand.
10
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Federal
Claims Without Prejudice and Motion to Remand (Doc. 10) is denied.
11
Dated this 5th day of August, 2016.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1
The Ninth Circuit has held that Rule 41(a)(1) permits a plaintiff to dismiss all claims
25 against a particular defendant, even if other defendants remain in the case, Pedrina v.
Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609 (9th Cir. 1993), but that is not what Plaintiff attempts to do
26 here.
2
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?