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)

Download PDF
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

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?