Moore v. A & K Partnership et al

Filing 14

ORDER DISMISSING CASE signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/23/2014. CASE CLOSED.(Flores, E)

1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

RONALD MOORE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
vs.
)
A & K Partnership, a California General
)
)
Partnership; ABDULGALIL FADHL
MOHSINHUSSEIN d/b/a PRIMOS FAMILY )
)
MARKET; and ROSALINDA MORALES, )
d/b/a Tacos La Piedad,
)
)
Defendants.

No. 1:14-cv-01595---BAM
ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF
COURT TO ADMINISTRATIVELY
CLOSE CASE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

On December 22, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal against all
Defendants (Doc.13) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).
In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A) provides as follow
[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action with a court order by filing: (i) 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.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A).

21

Rule 41(a)(1)(B) further provides that a dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A) is

22

without prejudice “[u]nless the notice or stipulation states otherwise.” Rule 41 thus allows the

23

parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, either by filing a notice of voluntary dismissal prior to

24

the filing of an answer, or after service of an answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss

25

signed by all of the parties who have appeared, although an oral stipulation in open court will

26

also suffice. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986).

27

Once a party files a notice of voluntary dismissal, no order of the court is necessary to

28

effectuate dismissal. Caselaw concerning voluntary dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A) is clear
that the entry of such a dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial

Page 1

1

approval. Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999).

2

“The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a

3

Rule 41(a)(1) notice,” and the dismissal “automatically terminates the action as to the

4

defendants who are the subjects of the notice.” Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692

5

(9th Cir. 1997).

6

Because Plaintiff has filed a Notice of Dismissal against Defendants under Rule

7

41(a)(1)(A)(i) with prejudice, this case has terminated.

8

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to administratively close this case.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
12

Dated:

/s/ Barbara

December 23, 2014

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 2