Smith v. Patton et al

Filing 17

ORDER granting 16 Motion to Dismiss. This action therefore is deemed dismissed without prejudice effective November 13, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles B Goodwin on 11/14/2017. (jb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
SEBASTIAN SMITH,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT PATTON, Director, et al.,
Defendants.

Case No. CIV-17-731-F

ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner appearing pro se, has filed a Motion to Dismiss the abovecaptioned action. In his Motion, Plaintiff seeks to dismiss his pending claims without
prejudice. See Doc. No. 16 (filed Nov. 13, 2017).
Because no defendant has answered or moved for summary judgment, Plaintiff’s
Motion operates as a dismissal of this lawsuit “without a court order.” See Fed. R.
41(a)(1)(A)(i); Janssen v. Harris, 321 F.3d 998, 999-1001 (10th Cir. 2003) (holding that
order of dismissal was a nullity because “under Rule 41(a)(1)(i) [now Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i)],
a plaintiff has an absolute right to dismiss without prejudice and no action is required on
the part of the court”). The filing of a Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) notice “closes the file” and “the
court has no role to play.” Janssen, 321 F.3d at 1000 (internal quotation marks omitted).
This action therefore is deemed dismissed without prejudice effective November
13, 2017. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of November, 2017.