Oxman v. State Bar of California
Filing
30
ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 08/13/2013. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2013)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
BRIAN OXMAN,
Case No. 12-cv-05517-WHO
Plaintiff,
8
v.
ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
9
10
STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA,
Re: Dkt. Nos. 27, 28
Defendant.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
On July 19, 2013, while defendant State Bar of California's motion to dismiss was pending,
14
plaintiff Brian Oxman notified the Court that he planned to file an amended complaint but needed
15
additional time to do so. The Court granted plaintiff’s request and ordered that plaintiff file a first
16
amended complaint no later than July 29, 2013, stating that no further extensions will be granted.
17
Instead of filing an amended complaint on July 29, 2013, plaintiff Brian Oxman filed a “Request
18
for Dismissal Without Prejudice.” Dkt. No. 27.
19
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), a “plaintiff may dismiss an
20
action without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either
21
an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Here, the defendant has neither filed an answer
22
nor a motion for summary judgment. The Court treats the “Request for Dismissal Without
23
Prejudice” as a notice of dismissal and this case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of the
24
Court shall close the file.
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 13, 2013
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge
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?