IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 23, 2010
PETER GRAVES, PLAINTIFF,
HILLARY RANDOM CLINTON AND JAMES STEINBERG, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
On November 19, 2010, plaintiff filed his complaint in this matter and an application to proceed without the prepayment of fees, otherwise referred to as an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 2.) Ordinarily, the undersigned would screen plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to determine whether service of the complaint is proper as to any named defendants.
However, on November 19, 2010, plaintiff also filed a handwritten notice with the court that indicates that he wishes to "withdraw" from this action and that he will re-file this action at a later date. (Dkt. No. 3.) Although not expressly conveyed in plaintiff's notice, the undersigned construes plaintiff's notice to withdraw from this action as a notice of voluntary dismissal filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Because no party has yet filed an answer or motion for summary judgment-nor could they considering that plaintiff's complaint has not yet been screened or served-no court order is required to effectuate a voluntary dismissal without prejudice. However, the court enters this order for the sake of clarity.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. This action is dismissed without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
2. All pending dates in this action, if any, are vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.