Bank v. Las Vegas Justice Court et al

Filing 5

ORDER Accepting 3 Report and Recommendation in part and Granting 4 Motion to Dismiss without Prejudice. It is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED to the extent it is consistent with this Order. It is furthe r ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Complaint without Prejudice 4 is GRANTED. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice, and this case shall be CLOSED. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 11/6/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AF)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9

Steven J. Bank,
Case No.: 2:13-cv-00900-JAD-VCF

10

Plaintiff

11

vs.

12

Las Vegas Justice Court et al.,

13

Order Accepting Report and
Recommendation in Part [Doc. 3] and
Granting Motion to Dismiss
without Prejudice [Doc. 4]

Defendants

14
15
16

This case arises out of Plaintiff Steven Bank’s conspiracy-related claims against state and

17

private defendants. Doc. 1-1. Bank filed a Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in Forma

18

Pauperis, Doc. 1, on May 22, 2013. Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach entered an Order and Report

19

and Recommendation on September 6, 2013, granting Bank’s request for in forma pauperis status

20

and recommending that Bank’s claims be dismissed with prejudice. Doc. 3. On September 25,

21

2013, Bank filed a Motion to Withdraw Complaint without Prejudice, Doc. 4, which the Court treats

22

as a Motion to Dismiss without Prejudice, bearing in mind that federal courts “liberally construe the

23

‘inartful pleading’ of pro se litigants” like Bank. Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1137 (9th Cir.

24

1987) (quoting Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982) (per curiam)).

25

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 41 allows a plaintiff to “dismiss an action without a

26

court order by filing . . . a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a

27

motion for summary judgment.” If this is the plaintiff’s first dismissal “based on or including the

28

same claim,” then dismissal does not operate as an adjudication on the merits. See FED. R. CIV. P.

1

41(1)(B). Voluntary dismissal “means that the party is filing the dismissal without being compelled

2

by another party or the court.” Lake at Las Vegas Investors Grp., Inc. v. Pac. Malibu Dev. Corp.,

3

933 F.2d 724, 727 (9th Cir. 1991) (quoting Randall v. Merrill Lynch, 820 F.2d 1317, 1321 (D.C. Cir.

4

1987)). Such dismissal is an “absolute right” that “leaves no role for the court to play.” Am. Soccer

5

Co., v. Score First Enters., 187 F.3d 1108, 1109–10 (9th Cir. 1999).

6
7
8
9
10
11

The pleadings in this case have not yet closed and no defendant has filed an answer. Rule 41
therefore allows voluntary dismissal. Accordingly, and with good cause appearing,
It is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED to the extent it is consistent with this Order [Doc. 3];
It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint without Prejudice
[Doc. 4] is GRANTED;

12

This action is DISMISSED without prejudice, and this case shall be CLOSED.

13

DATED November 6, 2013.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

_________________________________
JENNIFER A. DORSEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE