Harris v. Gipson et al

Filing 12

ORDER Directing Clerk of the Court to Terminate Defendants M. Magana, J. Bugarin, J. Carranza, L. Hurtado, E. Molina, C. Perez, T. Quillen, G. Sander, I.J. Alvarado and A. Belnap terminated, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 9/20/17. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEVONTE B. HARRIS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. CONNIE GIPSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:17-cv-00640-DAD-SAB (PC) ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE DEFENDANTS G. SANDOR, E. MOLINA, J. BULGARIN, A. BELNAP, T. QUILLEN, J. CARRANZA, I. ALVARADO, L. HURTADO, C. PEREZ, AND M. MAGANA AS PARTIES IN THIS ACTION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a) (ECF No. 6) Plaintiff Devonte B. Harris is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 20 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff declined United States Magistrate Judge jurisdiction; 21 therefore, this matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 22 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 23 On August 9, 2017, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint, with leave to amend, for failure 24 to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 8.) On September 13, 2017, the Court granted 25 Plaintiff a thirty day extension of time to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 10.) 26 /// 27 /// 28 1 On September 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntarily dismissal of Defendants G. 1 2 Sandor, E. Molina, J. Bulgarin, A. Belnap, T. Quillen, J. Carranza, I. Alvarado, L. Hurtado, C. Perez, 3 and M. Magana. 4 Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all of the 5 defendants or claims in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 6 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). At this stage in the proceedings, Plaintiff has the absolute right to dismiss 7 his claims against Defendants G. Sandor, E. Molina, J. Bulgarin, A. Belnap, T. Quillen, J. Carranza, I. 8 Alvarado, L. Hurtado, C. Perez, and M. Magana, without prejudice. Duke Energy Trading & Mktg., 9 L.L.C. v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1049 (9th Cir. 2001). The filing of the notice itself has the effect of 10 terminating these Defendants, and the Court no longer has jurisdiction over the claims against those 11 Defendants. Id. However, Plaintiff is advised that if he wishes to amend his claims against the other 12 remaining Defendants, he must file an amended complaint in accordance with the deadline set forth in 13 the Court’s September 13, 2017, order granting his extension of time, or the action will be dismissed 14 for failure to comply with a court order and failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: 18 September 20, 2017 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 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?