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