Fisher v. No Named Defendant
ORDER dismissing this action, as of 2/4/16, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 3/4/16. (dkals, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 16-cv-00100-GPG
RAMON L. FISHER,
[NO NAMED DEFENDANT],
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
Plaintiff Ramon L. Fisher is in the custody of the Colorado Department of
Corrections and currently is incarcerated at the San Carlos Correctional Facility in
Pueblo, Colorado. Plaintiff initiated this action on January 14, 2016, by filing a Letter that
states Plaintiff is concerned for his safety because prison staff members are coming to
work Ahigh@ and then antagonize and abuse Aother inmates,@ mostly sexually, and by
making sexual comments. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff further asserts that he is threatened
daily by the mental health staff and targeted to draw the attention away from the security
staff. Plaintiff contends that the prison needs to be Araided.@ Id.
On, January 15, 2016, Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher entered an order
that directed Plaintiff to submit his claims on a Court-approved form used in filing prisoner
complaints and either to submit a Prisoner=s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915 or in the alternative to pay the $400 filing fee.
On February 4, 2016, Plaintiff submitted a Letter in this case and stated that he did
not intend to file a complaint but only wanted to notify the Court that the CDOC staff Ahas
organized as the Klan and the Court should send the Feds to [the prison].@ ECF No. 4 at
3. Plaintiff further states that he has filed three previous cases in which he had to pay
$1500 and he does not have the money to Agive the courts@ to apparently file another
action. Id. at 1. Plaintiff now has failed to comply with the January 15, 2016 Order to
Cure within the time allowed.
The Court, therefore, finds that Plaintiff does not intend to proceed with this action
at this time; and the Letter will be construed as a Voluntary Notice of Dismissal.
Rule 41(a)(1)(A) provides that Athe plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court
order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer
or a motion for summary judgment . . . .@ Defendant has not filed an answer in this
action. Further, a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) is effective immediately
upon the filing of a written notice of dismissal, and no subsequent
court order is necessary. See 8-41 James Wm. Moore et al., Moore=s Federal Practice
' 41.33(6)(a) (3d ed. 1997); Hyde Constr. Co. v. Koehring Co., 388 F.2d 501, 507 (10th
Cir. 1968). The case, therefore, will be closed as of February 4, 2016, the date the
Notice was filed with the Court. See Hyde Constr. Co., 388 F.2d at 507.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Voluntary Notice of Dismissal, ECF No. 4, is effective as of
February 4, 2016, the date Plaintiff filed the Notice in this action. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint and action are dismissed without
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this
BY THE COURT:
s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court
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?