Mrozek v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al

Filing 23

ORDER DISMISSING Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 4/10/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

Case No. 1:16-cv-01308-SKO

BRAD MROZEK,

10

Plaintiff,

11
v.

12
13

(Doc. 19)
OFFICER AMAYA, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION

_____________________________________/

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

On April 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Pursuant to F.R.C.P.
41(a)(2) (the “Motion”), in which Plaintiff requests that the Court dismiss Defendant California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (Doc. 19.) The remaining Defendants consented to
the dismissal of Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation during the
April 6, 2017 scheduling conference in this matter. Absent any objection to the dismissal of
Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Court finds that the
Motion has merit. See, e.g., Smith v. Lenches, 263 F.3d 972, 975 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A district court
should grant a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) unless a defendant can show
that it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result.” (citation omitted)). Accordingly, the
Court GRANTS the Motion, (Doc. 19), and DISMISSES Defendant California Department of
//

1 Corrections and Rehabilitation from this case.
2
3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4 Dated:
5

April 10, 2017

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

.