Jacquot v. The Pep Boy's Manny Moe and Jack of California

Filing 18

ORDER Closing Case Based on Unopposed Request to Dismiss, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/4/17. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 DIERDRE JACQUOT AND ROBERT JACQUOT, Plaintiffs, 13 14 15 v. Case No. 1:17-cv-00069-LJO-BAM ORDER CLOSING CASE BASED ON UNOPPOSED REQUEST TO DISMISS (ECF No. 15) THE PEP BOYS MANNY MOE & JACK OF CALIFORNIA, 16 Defendant. 17 18 19 Plaintiffs Diedre Jacquot and Robert Jacquot initiated this civil action on January 17, 20 2017. Defendant The Pep Boys Manny Moe & Jack of California answered the complaint on 21 March 21, 2017. 22 On July 25, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice requesting voluntary dismissal of this action 23 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 15.) On July 31, 2017, 24 Defendant filed a statement of non-opposition. (ECF No. 17.) 25 “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(i), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action 26 prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Commercial 27 Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quotation and 28 citation omitted). “Once the defendant serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment, 1 1 however, the plaintiff may no longer voluntarily dismiss under Rule 41(a)(1), but must file a 2 motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2).” Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 3 692 (9th Cir. 1999). Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s 4 request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). 5 “A district court should grant a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) unless a 6 defendant can show that it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result.” Smith v. Lenches, 7 263 F.3d 972, 975 (9th Cir. 2001). 8 Here, Defendant served an answer to the complaint, and thus dismissal under Rule 9 41(a)(1)(A) is not available. Nonetheless, Defendant has not opposed Plaintiff’s request and has 10 consented to voluntary dismissal. Based on Defendant’s non-opposition and consent, the Court 11 finds no reason to deny Plaintiff’s request for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), and this action shall 12 be closed. 13 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 14 1. Plaintiff’s motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) is GRANTED; 15 2. All pending motions, if any, are TERMINATED; and 16 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 17 This terminates the action in its entirety. 18 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ August 4, 2017 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?