World Bridge Technologies, Inc. v. Hugo Alonso, Inc. et al

Filing 26

ORDER of DISMISSAL and DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to Administratively Close Case, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/3/2014. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Pamela J. Scholefield (SBN 196368)
SCHOLEFIELD, P.C. – CONSTRUCTION LAW
10815 Rancho Bernardo Road, Suite 105
San Diego, CA 92127
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiff:
United States of America, for the use and benefit of
World Bridge Technologies, Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
FRESNO DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, for the )
use and benefit of:
)
WORLD BRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., )
a California corporation,
)
Use-Plaintiff,)
v.

CASE NO: 1:14-cv-01157-BAM
ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND
DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT
TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE
CASE

)
)
HUGO ALONSO, INC., a California
)
corporation; HUDSON INSURANCE
)
COMPANY, a Delaware corporation,
)
SURETEC INDEMNITY COMPANY, a
)
California corporation; DEVELOPERS
SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, )
an Iowa corporation; DOES 1 through 40,
)
inclusive,
)
Defendants. )

22
23

On December 2, 2014, the Plaintiff in this action filed a joint stipulation of voluntary

24
25
26
27
28

dismissal, with prejudice, signed by all parties to this action. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(A), in relevant part, provides:
[T]he plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (1) 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.

1

1
2
3

Rule 41(a)(1)(B) further provides that a dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A) is without prejudice
“[u]nless the notice or stipulation states otherwise.”

4

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) thus allows a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss an action with prejudice by

5

filing a written stipulation to that effect signed by all parties who have appeared in the action. Such

6

a stipulation of dismissal is self-executing and does not require an order of the court to effectuate

7
8

dismissal.

Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 147 (9th Cir. 1986) (Rule 41(a)(1) provides for

9

dismissal by the plaintiff without order of the court by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all

10

parties who have appeared in the action); DeLeon v. Marcos, 659 F.3d 1276, 1283 (10th Cir. 2011)

11

(“A stipulation of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or (ii) is self-executing and immediately

12

strips the district court of jurisdiction over the merits.”); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir.

13
14

1989) (“[c]aselaw concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) is clear that the entry of

15

such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval”)

16

(parentheses in original) (citation omitted); Casida v. Sears Holding Corp, No. 1:11-cv-1052-AWI-

17

JLT, 2013 WL 1314051, at *1 (E.D. Cal. April 1, 2013) (the filing of stipulation for dismissal with

18
19
20

prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) terminates the action).
Given that Plaintiff has filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice signed by all parties

21

to this action, this case is terminated.

22

administratively close the case.

23

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is ordered to

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25
26

Dated:

/s/ Barbara

December 3, 2014

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28

2