By The Glass, LLC v. Franmara, Inc.

Filing 62

Order denying, without prejudice, 61 Stipulated Dismissal of Entire Action. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 5/2/2014.(blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

BY THE GLASS, LLC,

Case No. 13-cv-00879-BLF

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER DENYING STIPULATED
DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

FRANMARA, INC., BARPARTS, INC.,
THE BRAVA GROUP LLC d/b/a/ BRAVA
MARKETING PROMOTIONS, JH
STUDIOS, INC., SHASTA PRINTING,
INC., and QUICK TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Re: Dkt. No. 61

Defendants.
13
14

On April 29, 2014, Plaintiff By The Glass, LLC/Govino, LLD and Defendant Franmara,

15

Inc. submitted a “Stipulated Dismissal of Entire Action With Prejudice.” Dkt. No. 61. Because

16

the stipulation does not comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the Court

17

declines to endorse the stipulation of dismissal.
Plaintiff’s initial Complaint, filed February 27, 2013, identified Franmara as the sole

18
19

named Defendant. Dkt. No. 1. On October 18, 2013, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint

20

(“FAC”) adding BarParts, Inc., The Brava Group LLC d/b/a Brava Marketing Promotions, JH

21

Studios, Inc., Shasta Printing, Inc., and Quick Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Sage as additional

22

defendants. Dkt. No. 37. All Defendants answered the FAC on November 11, 2013, thereby

23

appearing in this action. Dkt. No. 39.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 permits a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss an action

24
25

subject to certain restrictions. Where a plaintiff seeks to dismiss an opposing party who has

26

already answered or appeared in the case, the voluntary dismissal must be made by stipulation

27

“signed by all parties who have appeared” or by noticed motion. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii),

28

(B).

1

Here, Plaintiff and Franmara have submitted a stipulation of dismissal “[p]ursuant to

2

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1)” that would dismiss, with prejudice, Plaintiff’s

3

claims against all named Defendants, as well as the counterclaims of all Defendants against

4

Plaintiff. See Dkt. No. 61. However, the stipulation is only signed by counsel for Plaintiff and

5

counsel for Franmara. Id. There is no evidence that the other named Defendants have signed on

6

to this stipulation of dismissal. If Plaintiff seeks to dismiss its claims against all Defendants—and

7

if all of the Defendants seek to dismiss their counterclaims against Plaintiff—the parties must file

8

a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties in this action who have appeared.
Because Plaintiff and Franmara’s stipulation of dismissal is not signed by all parties who

10

have appeared, the Court cannot endorse said dismissal. The requested dismissal is accordingly

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

9

DENIED, without prejudice, and with leave to re-file a stipulation that complies with the Federal

12

Rules of Civil Procedure and any applicable standing orders of the Court.

13
14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 2, 2014
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2