Willis v. Enterprise Drilling Fluids, Inc. et al

Filing 87

ORDER VACATING 85 Order Closing Case; ORDER DENYING Without Prejudice 86 Request for Entry of Judgment in Favor of DrilTek, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 8/17/2017. Case REOPENED; Scheduled case deadlines RESTORED. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15

KENNETH WILLIS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
ENTERPRISE DRILLING FLUIDS, INC., et al., )
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-00688 - JLT
ORDER VACATING ORDER CLOSING THE
CASE
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN
FAVOR OF DRILTEK

16
On August 15, 2017, the plaintiff and defendant, Enterprise Drilling Fluids, Inc and James

17
18

Joslyn, filed a stipulation to dismiss the action as to these defendants. (Doc. 84) The stipulation relied

19

upon Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) and specifically cited this section. Id at 1. In reliance upon this

20

representation and not noting that defendant Driltek did not sign the stipulation, the Court ordered the

21

matter closed.1 (Doc. 85) Immediately thereafter, the plaintiff sought the entry of judgment related to

22

the Court’s grant of summary judgment. (Doc. 86) This alerted the Court that its prior order closing

23

the case was not proper.

24

Notably, Fed.R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) reads, “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a

25

court order by filing: . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Thus,

26

because Driltek did not sign the stipulation, the Court erred in closing the case. Thus, the Court

27
28

1

Indeed, the Court preserved the right of the class and the collection to bring class and PAGA claims “in a different action.”
(Doc. 85 at 2)

1

1
2

ORDERS:
1.

The Court’s order closing the case (Doc. 85) is VACATED and the case is reopened

3

with all of the scheduled case deadlines restored. In future, if the plaintiff wishes to dismiss the case,

4

he may file a proper stipulation signed by all parties who have appeared in this action

5

(Fed.R.Civ.P.41(a)(1)) or he may file a request to dismiss the entire action (Fed.R.Civ.P.41(a)(2)). If

6

he seeks to dismiss the action only as to one party, he SHALL move the Court to do so according to the

7

requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 21;

8

2.

9

The request for entry of judgment in favor of Driltek (Doc. 86) is DENIED without

prejudice.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 17, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2