Muhammad v. Sisto et al

Filing 25

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/15/11: Defendants shall file, within seven days, a statement whether they would be prejudiced by dismissal of this action, and by the dismissal of defendants' pending motions as moot; any averment of prejudice must be specific to defendants herein and to this litigation. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SHAKA SENEGAL MUHAMMAD,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13
14

No. 2:09-cv-0582 KJN P

vs.
D. K. SISTO, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
/

15
16

Plaintiff has filed a motion, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2),

17

to withdraw his complaint and close this action. Plaintiff states that he is about to be released

18

from prison and no longer wishes to pursue this litigation. Also pending before the court are

19

defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaint and to declare plaintiff a vexatious litigant.

20

Once defendants have appeared in an action, the action may be dismissed at

21

plaintiff’s request only by court order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). “A district court should grant a

22

motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) unless a defendant can show that it will suffer

23

some plain legal prejudice as a result.” Smith v. Lenches, 263 F.3d 972, 975 (9th Cir. 2001)

24

(citing Waller v. Fin. Corp. of Am., 828 F.2d 579, 583 (9th Cir. 1987) (fn. omitted).

25
26

Defendants shall file, within seven days, a statement whether they would be
prejudiced by dismissal of this action, and by the dismissal of defendants’ pending motions as
1

1

moot; any averment of prejudice must be specific to defendants herein and to this litigation.

2
3

SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 15, 2011

4
5

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7

muha0582.info

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2