State of California v. Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians

Filing 37

ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2) signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/28/14. The 30 Preliminary Injunction is dissolved and no longer remains in effect. CASE CLOSED. (Manzer, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

v.

No. 2:14-CV-01449 KJM CMK

ORDER

PASKENTA BAND OF NOMLAKI
INDIANS, a federally recognized
Indiantribe,
Defendant.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

On July 7, 2014, the court granted the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary
injunction in this case, enjoining the Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians from
1. Attempting to disturb, modify or otherwise change the
circumstances currently in effect with respect to operation of the
Rolling Hills Casino in Corning, California.
2. Deploying any armed personnel of any nature within 100 yards
from the Casino, the property on which the Casino is located, and
tribal properties surrounding the Casino including the nearby hotels,
gas station, and RV park (collectively, Tribal Properties).
3. Possessing, carrying, displaying, or otherwise having firearms on
the Tribal Properties.
Order at 3, ECF No. 30.

27

On October 1, 2014, the plaintiff filed a request for dismissal of this action without

28

prejudice and dissolution of the preliminary injunction entered on July 7, 2014. ECF No. 32. The
1

1

plaintiff reported in that request that “[t]he Paskenta Bank of Nomlaki Indians appears to have

2

cured its alleged breach of compact, and no imminent threat to the public health, safety, and

3

welfare presently exists.” Id.

4

On October 2, 2014, the court issued a minute order vacating the status conference

5

set for the same day and requiring any opposition to the plaintiff’s request for dismissal be filed

6

by October 24, 2014, any reply to be filed by October 31, 2014. ECF No. 33.

7

On October 2, 2014, a group of the Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians,

8

represented by McGregor Scott and Jonathan G. Riddell, gave notice of the voluntary dismissal of

9

its third-party complaint against Andrew Freeman, represented by Alex Anthony Lozada and

10
11
12

Robert A. Rosette, without prejudice. ECF No. 34.
No party filed an opposition to the plaintiff’s request for dismissal by the October
24, 2014 deadline.

13

Because it appears that no party objects to the plaintiff’s request for dismissal

14

without prejudice, and the third-party complaint has been dismissed, the court dismisses this

15

action without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2). The preliminary injunction, ECF No. 30, is

16

dissolved and no longer remains in effect.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 28, 2014.

19
20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2