Phillip W. Dunn v. Cate et al

Filing 66

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Second 64 Motion to Dismiss signed by District Judge Neil V. Wake on 08/19/2010. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 08/24/2010.(Flores, E)

(PC) Phillip W. Dunn v. Cate et al

Doc. 66

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Matthew Cate, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B e f o re the Court is Plaintiff's second Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Case (Doc. 64) a n d Defendants' Statement of Non-Opposition (Doc. 65), which states that Defendants' d o not object to voluntary dismissal with prejudice, as they have expended substantial re s o u rc e s in defending this case and have a pending motion for summary judgment. P la in tif f 's second Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Case does not state whether it seeks d is m is s a l with prejudice or without prejudice, but the Court already denied Plaintiff's first m o tio n for voluntary dismissal, which sought dismissal without prejudice (Doc. 62, 63). Defendants are entitled to have their pending motion for summary judgment ruled upon or to have this case voluntarily dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's second Motion to D is m is s Plaintiff's Case will be denied, but only because it does not explicitly state that it s e e k s dismissal with prejudice. A further motion for voluntary dismissal with prejudice w ill be granted if it is filed. Moreover, Plaintiff is required to file a response by August 2 4 , 2010, to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 59), and failure to file a vs. P h illip Dunn P la in tif f , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) N o . CV-08-0873-NVW ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

tim e ly response to that motion will result in granting the Motion for Summary Judgment if it is well founded. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's second Motion to Dismiss P la in tif f 's Case (Doc. 64) is denied, but only because it does not state whether it seeks d is m is s a l with prejudice or without prejudice. A further motion for voluntary dismissal w ith prejudice will be granted if it is filed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reaffirming the August 24, 2010 deadline for P la in tif f to file a response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. D A T E D this 19 th day of August, 2010.

-2-