Campos et al v. Fresno Deputy Sheriff's Association, County of Fresno et al

Filing 88

ORDER Re Stipulation of Dismissal,signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 09/19/2022.(Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

CESAR CAMPOS, et al.,

11
12
13
14
15

Case No. 1:18-cv-01660-AWI-EPG

Plaintiffs,
v.
FRESNO DEPUTY SHERIFF’S
ASSOCIATION, et al.,

ORDER RE: STIPULATIONS OF
DISMISSAL
(ECF No. 86, 87)

Defendants.

16
17

This matter is before the Court on two stipulations of dismissal. (ECF Nos. 86, 87). To
understand the context of these filings, some brief background information is needed.

18
19
20
21

The last operative complaint in this case, the second amended complaint, proceeded with
claims by Plaintiffs Cesar Campos, Latana Chandavong, Neng Her, Hugh Yang, and Nick Vang
against Defendants Fresno Deputy Sheriff’s Association and County of Fresno. (ECF No. 56). On
April 22, 2021, the presiding District Judge severed claims by Plaintiffs Her and Chandavong

22

against Defendants Fresno Deputy Sheriff’s Association and County of Fresno and transferred

23

them to a new case, 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG. (ECF No. 85, p. 20). The parties were directed to

24

use the newly issued case number for all further filings. (Id.). The District Judge declined to

25

exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims and directed the Clerk to

26

close the case. (Id.). Since then, in 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG, the parties have reached a

27

settlement with a dispositional document being due by no later than September 16, 2022. (ECF

28

No. 65 of 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG).
1

1

As for the stipulations of dismissal, the first states that the parties have settled all “of the

2

claims in this case as well as the claims in Chandavong v. Fresno Deputy Sheriff’s Association,

3

No. 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG, and the parties stipulate to a dismissal with prejudice of all of the

4

plaintiffs’ claims.” (ECF No. 86, p. 2). Although the instant case has already been closed, the

5

Court acknowledges the parties’ memorialization of the dismissal of this case with prejudice. See

6
7
8
9

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
The second stipulation of dismissal states that the parties “have reached a full settlement
of the claims in this case [meaning 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG] as well as the claims in Campos v.
Fresno Deputy Sheriff’s Association, No. 1:18-cv-01660-AWI-EPG, and the parties stipulate to a
dismissal with prejudice of all of the plaintiffs’ claims.” (ECF No. 87). The Court notes that this

10
stipulation of dismissal was filed in the wrong case, 1:18-cv-01660-AWI-EPG. However, the
11
12
13

Court will direct the Clerk to file the stipulation in the correct case, 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG,
and then address it after it is filed.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

14

1. The Court acknowledges the parties’ stipulation of dismissal with prejudice (ECF No. 86)

15

of all of Plaintiffs’ claims in the instant case, 1:18-cv-01660-AWI-EPG, and this case

16

remains closed.

17

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to file the parties’ second stipulation of dismissal (ECF No.

18

87) in the correct case, 1:21-cv-00675-AWI-EPG. After it is filed, the Court will address it

19

within that case.

20
21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 19, 2022

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2