J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Estrada

Filing 32

ORDER Closing Case in Light of Stipulation for Dismissal, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/11/14. CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

J&J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,

10
11
12
13
14

Plaintiff

CASE NO. 1:12-CV-1848 AWI SKO
ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL

v.
(Doc. No. 31)
MICHAEL JOE ESTRADA dba The
Orange Bar,
Defendant

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

On November 17, 2014, and following the filing of a notice of settlement, the parties filed
a stipulation for dismissal of this case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). See
Doc. No. 31. The stipulation states that the dismissal is without prejudice and subject to the
Court’s jurisdiction to enforce a settlement, but will become with prejudice if a motion to reopen
is not filed by December 15, 2014. See id. The notice is signed by all parties.
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.

Once a stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in open court,

27
28

no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A); Eitel v.

1

McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1473 n.4 (9th Cir. 1986). “Caselaw concerning stipulated dismissals

2

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

3

automatically and does not require judicial approval.” In re Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir.

4

1989); Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984).

5
6

Because the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case under Rule 41(a)(1),
this case has terminated. See id.

7
8
9

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all pending dates are VACATED and the
Clerk shall CLOSE this case in light of the parties’ Rule 41(a)(1) stipulation of dismissal.

10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12

Dated: December 11, 2014

13

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2