McClure v. Chen, et al.

Filing 93

ORDER directing the Clerk of the Court to dismiss Defendant, Horton and all claims against him, under Rule 41, with prejudice re 83 signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/20/2019. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GEORGE MCCLURE,

12
13
14
15

No. 1:14-cv-00932-DAD-GSA

Plaintiff,
v.
C.K. CHEN, et al.,

ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE
COURT TO DISMISS DEFENDANT
HORTON AND ALL CLAIMS AGAINST
HIM, UNDER RULE 41, WITH PREJUDICE

Defendants.
(Doc. No. 83)

16
17
18

Plaintiff George McClure is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with

19

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. This action is proceeding on plaintiff’s first

20

amended complaint, filed on February 9, 2015, against defendant C.K. Chen and C. Horton

21

(collectively “defendants”) for providing inadequate medical care in violation of the Eighth

22

Amendment. (Doc. No. 12.)

23

On March 21, 2019, a stipulation for voluntary dismissal of defendant Horton and all

24

claims brought against him by plaintiff under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii),

25

with prejudice, was filed with the court, reflecting the signatures of the pro se plaintiff and

26

counsel for defendants C.K. Chen and C. Horton. (Doc. No. 83.) Federal Rule of Civil

27

Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) allows plaintiffs to “dismiss an action without a court order by filing a

28

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” The stipulation filed on March
1

1

21, 2019 is signed by all parties who have appeared in this case. Therefore, the parties’

2

stipulation is given full force and effect, and defendant Horton and all claims against him are

3

dismissed from this case with prejudice as of the date the stipulation was filed. The Clerk of the

4

Court shall reflect the dismissal of defendant Horton on the court’s docket in this action.

5

Accordingly,

6

1. The parties’ stipulation for voluntary dismissal of defendant Horton and all the claims

7
8

against him is effective as of the date it was filed;
2. Defendant Horton and all the claims against him in this case have been dismissed with

9
10

prejudice; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to reflect the dismissal of defendant Horton on the
court’s docket in this action.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 20, 2019
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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