Garcia v. Martinez et al
Filing
18
ORDER CLOSING the Case Due to Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice 17 , signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 4/24/14. (CASE CLOSED)(Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GEORGE GARCIA,
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
16
v.
MARTINEZ, et al.,
Case No. 1:13-cv-01389-LJO-JLT (PC)
ORDER CLOSING THE CASE DUE
TO VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
(Doc. 17)
Defendants.
On April 16, 2014, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal of this case without prejudice.
17
Although not stated in the notice, the Court construes it as one made pursuant to Federal Rule of
18
Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(i).
19
In Wilson v. City of San Jose, the Ninth Circuit explained:
20
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, 60910 (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. DavenportHarris 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.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
1
Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).
2
No answers to Plaintiff's complaint and no motions for summary judgment have been filed
3
in this case. It appears that no such answers or motions for summary judgment have been served.
4
Because Plaintiff has exercised his right to voluntarily dismiss the complaint under Rule 41(a)(1),
5
this case has terminated. See Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692.
6
7
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is ordered to close this case in light
of Plaintiff's Rule 41(a)(1)(i) requested dismissal without prejudice.
8
9
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
April 24, 2014
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
11
12
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?