Moore v. SVP Partners, LLC et al

Filing 24

ORDER DISMISSING CASE with Prejudice as to all Defendants, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/14/2015. CASE CLOSED(Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

RONALD MOORE,

13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.

15
16
17
18

SVP PARTNERS, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

) No. 1:15-cv-00320---SKO
)
) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF
)
) COURT TO CLOSE CASE
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

19
20

On August 13, 2015, Plaintiff Ronald Moore (“Plaintiff”) filed a notice of voluntary

21

dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (Doc. 23.)

22

In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A) provides as follows:

23

25

[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action without 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.

26

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). "The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some

27

or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice," and the dismissal "automatically

28

terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice." Wilson v. City of

24

Page 1

1

San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Because Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of

2

before an answer or motion for summary judgment was filed by any defendant, this case has

3

terminated. Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1.

The entire matter is DISMISSED with prejudice as to all Defendants; and

6

2.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close this case.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 14, 2015

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 2