Vanhoozen v. Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC

Filing 6

ORDER CLOSING CASE, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 6/22/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

HOWARD VANHOOZEN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

vs.
ENHANCED RECOVERY COMPANY,
LLC, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
Defendant.

) Case No. 1:17-cv-00761-LJO-JLT
)
) [PROPOSED] ORDER CLOSING CASE
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

17
18

On June 22, 2017, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Doc. 5) Federal Rules of

19

Civil Procedure Rule 41 provides that “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by

20

filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for

21

summary judgment . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). Once such a notice has been filed, an order of the

22

Court is not required to make the dismissal effective. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692

23

(9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this action in light of the

24

notice of dismissal with prejudice filed and properly signed pursuant to Rule 41(a).

25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 22, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28