Surbaugh v. Sandridge Energy Inc et al

Filing 89

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 7/29/2015. (mb)

IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
STEVE SURBAUGH, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
SANDRIDGE ENERGY, INC., TOM L.
)
WARD, JAMES D. BENNETT, EDDIE M.
)
LEBLANC, and RANDALL D. COOLEY,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________________)
)
STEVEN T. DAKIL, Individually and on
)
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
SANDRIDGE ENERGY, INC., TOM L.
)
WARD, JAMES D. BENNETT, and EDDIE
)
M. LEBLANC,
)
)
Defendants
)

Case No. CIV-14-1252-D

Consolidated with:

Case No. CIV-14-1256-D

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
By Order of July 13, 2015, the Court directed the named plaintiffs to show cause
within 14 days why their respective complaints should not be dismissed without prejudice
for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff Steve Surbaugh has made no timely response to the Order,
and the Court therefore finds that his Class Action Complaint should be dismissed. Plaintiff
Steve Dakil has filed a response but states that he does intend to pursue his Class Action
Complaint and it should be dismissed. Because no defendant has answered or moved for
summary judgment, Plaintiff Dakil’s unequivocal statement that he wants his action

dismissed operates as a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). See Janssen v. Harris, 321 F.3d 998, 1000 (10th Cir. 2003); see also
Netwig v. Georgia-Pac. Corp., 375 F.3d 1009, 1010 (10th Cir. 2004).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this consolidated action is DISMISSED without
prejudice to refiling. This Order of Dismissal shall be filed in each of the subject cases.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of July, 2015.

2