Jane Doe #2 v. State of California et al

Filing 19

ORDER GRANTING Extension of Time to File Dispositional Documents, Discharging Order to Show Cause, and Dismissing Action Pursuant to Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/13/2023. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 Case No. 1:23-cv-00869-JLT-SAB JANE DOE #2, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE DISPOSITIONAL DOCUMENTS, DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, AND DISMISSING ACTION PURSUANT TO NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL (ECF Nos. 16, 17, 18) 16 17 18 On October 3, 2023, this matter was settled at a settlement conference at least as to some 19 named parties, and dispositional documents were to be filed withing thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 20 15.) On November 7, 2023, the Court issued an order to show cause as neither dispositional 21 documents, nor a request for extension, was filed by the deadline. (ECF No. 16.) 22 On November 7, 2023, counsel for Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause 23 indicating that: the parties were working on draft settlement agreements after the date of 24 settlement; the final drafts of these agreements were emailed by defense counsel on October 23, 25 2023; after receipt of the final drafts, Plaintiff’s counsel worked diligently to obtain client 26 signatures, and obtained the client’s signature on October 24, 2023; counsel for Plaintiff emailed 27 the executed settlement agreement to defense counsel on October 25, 2023; counsel for Plaintiff 28 has requested a fully executed copy of the Settlement Agreement and Release prior to filing 1 1 dismissal documents, but has not been provided a fully executed copy as of the date of the 2 declaration; counsel for Plaintiff has indicated that he will sign and return dismissal documents as 3 soon as Jane Doe #2 receives a copy of the fully executed settlement agreement; counsel for 4 Plaintiff respectfully requests an additional 30 days to file dismissal documents as it is unknown 5 when a fully executed copy will be provided; and counsel will immediately sign and return 6 dispositional documents upon receipt of the fully executed settlement agreement. (ECF No. 17 at 7 1-2.) 8 While Defendants have not directly provided a response to the order to show cause, in 9 light of the Plaintiff’s filing, and the stipulation of dismissal immediately filed thereafter by 10 Defendants, discussed next, the Court shall discharge the order to show cause. However, in most 11 cases, the Court would not discharge an order to show cause until all parties have explained their 12 positions. 13 On November 9, 2023, a stipulation of dismissal was filed pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) 14 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 18.) The stipulation is filed by counsel for 15 Plaintiff, and by counsel for Defendants State of California, CDCR, and M. Pallares. Defendant 16 Greg Rodriguez is named as a Defendant, however, has not appeared in this action, as noted in 17 the filing. No Defendant has filed an answer or motion for summary judgment. The filing 18 provides that the stipulating parties agree to dismissal of this action and all claims and causes of 19 action with prejudice, and with the parties to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees. 20 Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, ‘a plaintiff has an 21 absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a 22 motion for summary judgment.’ ” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 23 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 24 1997)). Additionally, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides that a “plaintiff 25 may dismiss an action without a court order by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all 26 parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 27 In light of the filing, this action has been terminated, Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i)-(ii); 28 Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997), and has been dismissed with 2 1 prejudice and without an award of costs or attorneys’ fees. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. 4 The order to show cause issued on November 7, 2023, (ECF No. 16), is DISCHARGED; 5 2. 6 Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time to file dispositional documents is GRANTED; and 7 3. 8 The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE the file in this case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 13, 2023 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?