Juarez v. United States Postal Service

Filing 33

ORDER. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The parties shall bear their own costs, attorney fees, and expenses. The court expressly does not retain jurisdiction over the above-captioned action, this settlement, or the United States. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate any pending motions and deadlines and to close this case. Signed by Judge Julie S. Sneed on 3/5/2025. (JWM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
JUAN JUAREZ,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 6:23-cv-1573-JSS-DCI

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
___________________________________/
ORDER
Plaintiff has filed a Joint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice. (Joint
Stipulation, Dkt. 32.) Because this document is styled a joint stipulation, the court
presumes that Plaintiff is seeking dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which permits a Plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss his case by filing a joint
“stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Upon review of
the docket, the Joint Stipulation is signed by all the parties who have appeared in the
lawsuit. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); see City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hosp.
Holdings, L.P., 82 F.4th 1031, 1034 (11th Cir. 2023) (“Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) . . . permits
a plaintiff to dismiss an action without a court order by filing ‘a stipulation of dismissal
signed by all parties who have appeared.’”) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)).
Out of an abundance of caution, given the confusion as to whether the United
States Postal Service has appeared in this case, (see Dkt. 18), the court alternatively
construes the Joint Stipulation as a motion to dismiss this case under Rule 41(a)(2),

which provides for dismissal upon court order “on terms that the court considers
proper.” See Sanchez v. Discount Rock & Sand, Inc., 84 F.4th 1283, 1292 (11th Cir. 2023)
(“Rule 41(a)(2), by its plain language, doesn’t require a motion . . . [a]nd, several
times, we’ve approved dismissal orders that treated Rule 41(a)(1)(A) notices and
stipulations as requests for a Rule 41(a)(2) court order.”). The court finds the terms
the parties seek in the Joint Stipulation to be proper, and so grants Plaintiff’s construed
motion for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2).
Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The parties shall bear
their own costs, attorney fees, and expenses. The court expressly does not retain
jurisdiction over the above-captioned action, this settlement, or the United States. The
Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate any pending motions and deadlines and to close
this case.
ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on March 5, 2025.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record

-2-