Fields v. Davis et al
Filing
17
ORDER Granting Motion To Dismiss Pursuant To Rule 41 (Doc. 16 ), ORDER Dismissing Action In Its Entirety Without Prejudice, ORDER Directing Clerk To Close File, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 9/13/2014. CASE CLOSED.(Fahrney, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
KEVIN E. FIELDS,
12
13
14
15
1:12-cv-00384-GSA-PC
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
DISMISS PURSUANT TO RULE 41
(Doc. 16.)
vs.
RON DAVIS, et al.,
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION IN ITS
ENTIRETY WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Defendants.
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO CLOSE
FILE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Kevin E. Fields (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on
March 14, 2012. (Doc. 1.)
On March 22, 2012, Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in this action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(c), and no other parties have made an appearance. (Doc. 4.)
Therefore, pursuant to Appendix A(k)(4) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of
California, the undersigned shall conduct any and all proceedings in the case until such time as
reassignment to a District Judge is required. Local Rule Appendix A(k)(3).
On September 10, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss this action pursuant to Rule
41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 16.)
1
1
In Wilson v. City of San Jose, the Ninth Circuit explained:
2
10
Under Rule 41(a)(1), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily
dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for
summary judgment. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995)
(citing Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman American Express, 813 F.2d 1532, 1534
(9th Cir. 1987)). A plaintiff may dismiss his action so long as the plaintiff files
a notice of dismissal prior to the defendant=s service of an answer or motion for
summary judgment. The dismissal is effective on filing and no court order is
required. Id. The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some
or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice. Id.; Pedrina v. Chun, 987
F.2d 608, 609-10 (9th Cir. 1993). The filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal
with the court automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are
the subjects of the notice. Concha, 62 F.2d at 1506. Unless otherwise stated,
the dismissal is ordinarily without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to commence
another action for the same cause against the same defendants. Id. (citing
McKenzie v. Davenport-Harris Funeral Home, 834 F.2d 930, 934-35 (9th Cir.
1987)). Such a dismissal leaves the parties as though no action had been
brought. Id.
11
Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). No defendant has filed an
12
answer or motion for summary judgment in this action. Therefore, Plaintiff=s motion shall be
13
granted.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
14
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
15
1.
16
Plaintiff=s motion to dismiss the complaint, filed on September 10, 2014, is
GRANTED;
17
2.
This action is DISMISSED in its entirety without prejudice; and
18
3.
The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close the file in this case and adjust the
19
docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a).
20
21
22
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
September 13, 2014
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
24
25
26
27
28
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?