Barger v. California State Prison, Corcoran et al
Filing
17
ORDER CLOSING CASE re 16 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/28/2013. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
GARY DALE BARGER,
CASE No. 1:12-cv-01872-AWI-MJS (PC)
10
Plaintiff,
11
VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ACTION
(ECF No. 16)
12
v.
CLERK SHALL CLOSE CASE
13
14
CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON,
CORCORAN, et al.,
15
16
Defendants.
/
17
18
Plaintiff Gary Dale Barger, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil
19
rights action on November 15, 2012 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. (ECF No. 1.)
20
Plaintiff consented to extend Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to all proceedings and
21
for all purposes. (ECF No. 14.)
22
Plaintiff's Complaint was dismissed on December 19, 2012, for failure to state a
23
claim, but he was given leave to file and amended complaint. (ECF No.4.) Plaintiff filed
24
a First Amended Complaint on December 28, 2012. (ECF No. 8.) The Court screened
25
the First Amended Complaint and on February 14, 2013 issued Findings and a
26
Recommendation that the action be dismissed as frivolous and for failing to state a
27
Caim; objection, if any, to Findings and Recommendation were to be filed not later than
28
1
1
February 22, 2013. (ECF No. 12.)
On February 27, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Notice with the Court voluntarily dismissing
2
3
this action. (ECF No. 16.)
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a
4
5
court order by filing a notice of dismissal. Plaintiff’s February 27, 2013 Notice is
6
sufficient as a notice of dismissal under Rule 41.
Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, this action is hereby DISMISSED
7
8
without prejudice.
The Clerk shall CLOSE this case.
9
10
11
IT IS SO ORDERED.
12
Dated:
ci4d6
February 28, 2013
Michael J. Seng
/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
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?