Robinson v. Kitt

Filing 9

ORDER Re Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Directing Clerk to Close File 7 , signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/4/17: Case voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(a). (CASE CLOSED)(Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAMUEL ROBINSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 1:17-cv-00577-DAD-GSA (PC) ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL, DIRECTING CLERK TO CLOSE FILE v. KITT, 15 Defendant. (Doc. No. 7) 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff Samuel Robinson a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action 20 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on April 24, 21 2017. (Doc. No. 1.) In his complaint, plaintiff names one defendant, Dr. Kitt, and alleges that he 22 received inadequate medical care arising from surgery performed by Dr. Kitt on plaintiff for nasal 23 polyps. 24 On July 5, 2017, the court issued an order requiring plaintiff to either (i) show cause why 25 this case should not be dismissed as erroneously submitted to this court, or (ii) file a “Notice of 26 Voluntary Dismissal Under Rule 41,” within twenty-one days. (Doc. No. 6.) In the order, the 27 court advised plaintiff of his right to voluntarily dismiss this action under Rule 41(a)(1). (Id. at 2, 28 n.2.) On July 20, 2017, plaintiff filed a notice with the court stating that he wishes to voluntarily 1 1 dismiss this case “according to court order.” (Doc. No. 7.) The court construes plaintiff’s notice 2 as a notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1). The Ninth Circuit has explained: 3 Under Rule 41(a)(1), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman American Express, 813 F.2d 1532, 1534 (9th Cir. 1987)). A plaintiff may dismiss his action so long as the plaintiff files a notice of dismissal prior to the defendant’s service of an answer or motion for summary judgment. The dismissal is effective on filing and no court order is required. Id. The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice. Id.; Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609–10 (9th Cir. 1993). The filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice. Concha, 62 F.2d at 1506. Unless otherwise stated, the dismissal is ordinarily without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to commence another action for the same cause against the same defendants. Id. (citing McKenzie v. Davenport-Harris Funeral Home, 834 F.2d 930, 934-35 (9th Cir. 1987)). Such a dismissal leaves the parties as though no action had been brought. Id. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997) (emphasis and footnote omitted). 15 No defendant has filed an answer or motion for summary judgment in this action. Therefore, 16 plaintiff’s notice of dismissal is effective as of the date it was filed, and this case will be closed 17 pursuant to the filing of the notice of dismissal. 18 Accordingly: 19 1. Plaintiff’s notice of dismissal is effective as of the date it was filed; 20 2. This action is dismissed in its entirety without prejudice; and 21 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case and adjust the docket to reflect 22 23 24 voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 4, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?