Medina v. National Oilwell Varco, L.P.

Filing 50

ORDER CLOSING CASE, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 2/24/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JORGE MEDINA, an individual

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 1:15-CV-00235-DAD-JLT
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF
ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE

DNOW, L.P. and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive (Doc. 49)

15

Defendant.

16
17

On February 23, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation dismissing the action and agreeing that

18

each side will bear their own costs. (Doc. 49) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 41 provides

19

that “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: . . . a stipulation of

20

dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.”. . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). Once such a notice

21

has been filed, an order of the Court is not required to make the dismissal effective. Fed. R. Civ. P.

22

41(a)(1)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk

23

of Court is DIRECTED to close this action in light of the notice of dismissal with prejudice filed

24

and properly signed pursuant to Rule 41(a).

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 24, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE