Brock v. Brennan

Filing 5

ORDER granting plaintiff's request for a voluntary dismissal 4 Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION RANDALL BROCK, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 16-CV-11457 HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH v. MEGAN J. BRENNAN, Postmaster General, U.S. Postal Service, Defendant. / ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR A VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL (DOC. 4) Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s request that the instant “case [be] dropped or frozen, due to the fact that [Plaintiff has] not received [a] final decision from the EEOC.” (Doc. 4). The Court interprets the instant request as a request for a voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) or a stay pending exhaustion of Plaintiff’s administrative remedies. The Court finds that a stay would be inappropriate. Exhaustion of administrative remedies is a condition precedent to bringing a Title VII employment-discrimination action, see McFarland v. Henderson, 307 F.3d 402, 408 (6th Cir. 2002), and Plaintiff states that he has not yet exhausted his remedies. There appears to be no reason for this Court to retain jurisdiction of the instant action, as Plaintiff has no other pending claims and has not yet served Defendant. Plaintiff is, however, entitled to a voluntary dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a). -1- Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for a voluntary dismissal is GRANTED. The instant action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 2, 2016 s/George Caram Steeh GEORGE CARAM STEEH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on May 2, 2016, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and also on Randall Brock, 19783 Appoline, Detroit, MI 48235. s/Barbara Radke Deputy Clerk -2-

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?