IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 2, 2011
GREGORY BOYD, PLAINTIFF,
CAPITOL ONE SERVICES, LLC, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
On April 7, 2011, defendant removed plaintiff's complaint from the small claims division of the Yolo County Superior Court. (Notice of Removal, Dkt. No. 1.) On April 13, 2011, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint. (Mot. to Dismiss, Dkt. No. 9.) On April 26, 2011, however, plaintiff filed a document entitled "Plaintiff's Motion to Request Dismissal with Prejudice" (Dkt. No. 10), which the undersigned construes as a notice of dismissal filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Plaintiff requests that his case against "Capitol One Bank (USA), N.A. . . ., erroneously sued as Capitol One Services," be dismissed with prejudice.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A) provides that "the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment . . . ." Dismissal under this rule requires no action on the part of the court and divests the court of jurisdiction once the notice of voluntary dismissal is filed. See, e.g., United States v. Real Property Located at 475 Martin Lane, Beverly Hills, CA, 545 F.3d 1134, 1145 (9th Cir. 2008).
Because defendant has not yet filed an answer or motion for summary judgment in this case, plaintiff's request for dismissal is effective without a court order. This case is dismissed with prejudice.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's case is dismissed with prejudice.
2. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case and all dates are vacated in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.