McCoy v. Stratton et al
Filing
97
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 2/7/2018 DISMISSING this action with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). CASE CLOSED.(Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DAVON E. McCOY,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:12-cv-1137 WBS DB
v.
ORDER
J. STRATTON, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42
17
18
U.S.C. § 1983. A telephonic settlement conference was held on October 31, 2017. After
19
negotiations the parties resolved this case in its entirety. Pursuant to the settlement agreement the
20
plaintiff and remaining defendants,1 Barnes, Dingfelder, Epp, Hughes, Sweeney, and Stratton,
21
stipulated that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
22
41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
23
////
24
////
25
1
26
27
28
Defendant Grinde was previously dismissed from this action. Grinde was only named as a
defendant in plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim, which was dismissed by the court. See ECF
No. 43 at 13 (recommending defendant’s summary judgment motion be granted on plaintiff’s
deliberate indifference claim) and ECF No. 44 (adopting the findings and recommendations in
full).
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice
2
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
3
Dated: February 7, 2018
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
DLB:12
DLB:1/Orders/Prisoner-Civil Rights/mcco1137.59c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
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?