Reberger v. Byrne et al
Filing
7
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Motion for voluntary dismissal 6 is granted. This action dismissed without prejudice. Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 3/6/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
***
10
LANCE REBERGER,
11
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
12
13
Case No. 3:15-cv-00064-MMD-VPC
MICHAEL BYRNE, et al.,
Defendants.
14
15
16
I.
DISCUSSION
17
Plaintiff, a pro se prisoner, previously filed an application to proceed in forma
18
pauperis and a motion for temporary restraining order and permanent injunction. (Dkt.
19
no. 1, 1-1.) This Court denied the application to proceed in forma pauperis because
20
Plaintiff had three strikes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and denied the motion for
21
temporary restraining order and permanent injunction. (Dkt. no. 3 at 2, 5.)
22
Plaintiff now files a motion for voluntary dismissal. (Dkt. no. 6.) Pursuant to
23
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a
24
court order by filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an
25
answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The Court
26
grants Plaintiff’s motion to voluntarily dismiss this action because no responsive
27
pleading has been filed in this case. As such, the Court dismisses this action without
28
prejudice.
1
2
3
II.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the motion for voluntary dismissal
(dkt. no. 6) is granted.
4
It is further ordered that this action is dismissed in its entirety without prejudice.
5
It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
6
DATED THIS 6th day of March 2015.
7
8
9
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?