Yeng v. Hill
Filing
17
ORDER GRANTING 16 Motion for Voluntary Dismissal of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus; ORDER DISMISSING the Petition without Prejudice 1 and DIRECTING the Clerk to Close the Action,signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 03/03/2015. CASE CLOSED (Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11 XIONG YENG,
Case No. 1:13-cv-01734-AWI-BAM-HC
12
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION
13
14
Petitioner,
v.
15 RICK HILL, Warden,
16
Respondent.
FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF THE
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
(DOC. 16)
ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITION
WITHOUT PREJUDICE (DOC. 1) AND
DIRECTING THE CLERK TO CLOSE THE
ACTION
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254.
Pending before the Court is the Petitioner’s request
for voluntary dismissal of the petition.
I.
Voluntary Dismissal of the Petition
The named respondent has not appeared in the action.
On
December 23, 2014, Petitioner filed the instant motion for voluntary
dismissal of the petition.
Subject to other provisions of law, a petitioner may
voluntarily dismiss an action without leave of court before service
1
1 by the adverse party of an answer or motion for summary judgment.
2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a).
Otherwise, an action shall not be dismissed
3 except upon order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as
4 the court deems proper.
5
Id.
Here, no answer or motion to dismiss has been served or filed.
6 Thus, Petitioner is entitled to dismissal.
7
II.
Disposition
8
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that, pursuant to Petitioner’s
9 voluntary dismissal, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is
10 DISMISSED without prejudice and the Clerk is DIRECTED to close this
11 action.
12
13 IT IS SO ORDERED.
14 Dated: March 3, 2015
15
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?