Haney v. Saldana, et al

Filing 122

ORDER Closing Case in Light of Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 02/14/2014. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

BRUCE PATRICK HANEY,

9

Plaintiff

10
11
12

v.

CASE NO. 1:04-CV-5935 AWI SMS (PC)
ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE

R. SALDANA, et al.,
(Doc. No. 121)
Defendant

13
14
15

On January 27, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice

16

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). See Doc. No. 121. The notice is signed by

17

all remaining parties who have appeared in this case.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:
(A) . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a
notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion
for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who
have appeared. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the
dismissal is without prejudice.
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an
answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties who have appeared,

25
26
27
28

although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. See Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. &
Loan Asso., 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th
Cir. 1986). Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made

1

in open court, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. Pro.

2

41(a)(1)(A); Eitel, 782 F.2d at 1473 n.4. “Caselaw concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule

3

41(a) (1) (ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and

4

does not require judicial approval.” In re Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989); Gardiner v.

5
6

A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984); see also Gambale v. Deutsche Bank AG,
377 F.3d 133, 139 (2d Cir. 2004); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074,

7
8

1077 (9th Cir. 1999).
As the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice under Rule

9
10

41(a)(1) that is signed by all remaining parties who have made an appearance, this case has

11

terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d at 466; Gardiner, 747 F.2d

12

at 1189; see also Gambale, 377 F.3d at 139; Commercial Space Mgmt, 193 F.3d at 1077.

13
14
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all pending dates are VACATED and the
15
16
17

Clerk shall CLOSE this case in light of the filed and properly signed Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)
Stipulation Of Dismissal With Prejudice.

18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21

Dated: February 14, 2014

22
23

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

ciem0h3i

24
25
26
27
28
2