Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Amie Holak, Individually and On Behalf of v. Kmart Corporation

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 12, 2012

AMIE HOLAK, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC SIMILARLY SITUATED
PLAINTIFF,
v.
KMART CORPORATION, A MICHIGAN CORPORATION; SEARS HOLDINGS MANAGEMENT, A DELAWARE CORPORATION; ADIN VELASQUEZ; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT ADIN VELASQUEZ IN LIGHT OF JOINT STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL (Doc. No. 30)

On July 6, 2012, Plaintiff filed a joint stipulation for voluntary dismissal of Defendant Adin Velasquez only, without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The stipulation is signed by all parties in this case.

Rule 41(a)(1)(A), in relevant part, reads: 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; or

(ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties, although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. & Loan Asso., 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986). "The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice," and the dismissal "automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice." Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995).

Because the parties have filed a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) as to Adin Velasquez only that is signed by all parties who have made an appearance, this case has terminated as to Adin Velasquez only. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Adin Velasquez is DISMISSED from this case without prejudice in light of the parties' filed and properly signed Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) stipulation of dismissal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20120712

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.