Fugawa v. Trimble et al

Filing 110

ORDER Closing Case In Light of Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 3/19/19. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

PETER FUGAWA,

10

No. 1:11-cv-00966-LJO-SKO (PC)

Plaintiff,
ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE

11

v.

12

TRIMBLE, et al.,
(Docs. 109)

13

Defendants.

14
15
16
17

On March 15, 2019, the parties filed a stipulation for voluntary dismissal with prejudice of
this matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).1

18

Rule 41(a)(1)(A), in relevant part, reads:

19
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; (ii) a stipulated dismissal signed by all
parties who have appeared.

20
21
22

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an

23

answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties who have appeared,

24

although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. & Loan

25

Asso., 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir.

26

1986). Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in

27

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

28

1

Plaintiff filed a separate notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a) that same day. (See Doc. 77.)

1

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984); see also Gambale v. Deutsche Bank AG,

5

377 F.3d 133, 139 (2d Cir. 2004); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074,

6

1077 (9th Cir. 1999) cf. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997) (addressing

7

Rule 41(a)(1) dismissals).

8

This case terminated when the parties filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice under

9

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) that was properly signed by all parties who have appeared in this action. See

10

Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d at 466; Gardiner, 747 F.2d at 1189; see

11

also Gambale, 377 F.3d at 139; Commercial Space Mgmt, 193 F.3d at 1077; cf. Wilson, 111 F.3d

12

at 692.

13

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court close this case in light

14

of the properly executed Stipulation for Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice under Federal Rule

15

of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
Dated:
18

March 19, 2019

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

.