IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 21, 2013
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF VOLUNTARY CORRECTIONS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF PLAINTIFF'S RULE 41(a)(1) NOTICE OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
On March 20, 2013, Plaintiff filed a request to dismiss his case without prejudice. Although not cited by Plaintiff (who is pro se and incarcerated), the dismissal is pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).
Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:
(A) . . . 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. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice.
In Wilson v. City of San Jose, the Ninth Circuit explained:
Under Rule 41(a)(1), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman American Express, 813 F.2d 1532, 1534 (9th Cir. 1987)). A plaintiff may dismiss his action so long as the plaintiff files a notice of dismissal prior to the defendant's service of an answer or motion for summary judgment. The dismissal is effective on filing and no court order is required. Id. The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice. Id.; Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609-10 (9th Cir. 1993). The filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice. Concha, 62 F.2d at 1506. Unless otherwise stated, the dismissal is ordinarily without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to commence another action for the same cause against the same defendants. Id. (citing McKenzie v. Davenport-Harris Funeral Home, 834 F.2d 930, 934-35 (9th Cir. 1987)). Such a dismissal leaves the parties as though no action had been brought. Id.
Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).
No answers to Plaintiff's complaint and no motions for summary judgment have been filed in this case, and it appears that no such answers or summary judgment motions have been served. Because Plaintiff has exercised his right to voluntarily dismiss the complaint under Rule 41(a)(1) without prejudice, this case has terminated. See Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is ordered to CLOSE this case in light of Plaintiff's Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) requested dismissal without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.