Opinion
3:23-CV-392-DMB-JMV
01-19-2024
ABDULMOHSEN ALASMAR O ALSUWAYLIMI PLAINTIFF v. ANTONY BLINKEN, Secretary of State of the United States; MICHAEL RATNEY, U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia DEFENDANTS
ORDER
DEBRA M. BROWN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On January 4, 2024, Abdulmohsen Alasmar O Alsuwaylimi filed a motion to dismiss this case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), representing as cause that he “no longer wishes to pursue this action” and that “[t]o [his] knowledge there are no counterclaims asserted against [him].” Doc. #8 at 1. The defendants did not respond to the motion.
According to Alsuwaylimi, granting his request for dismissal “would serve the interests of justice, including due process and the assistance of counsel.” Doc. #8 at 1.
Upon consideration, the motion to dismiss [8] is GRANTED. So the defendants' pending motion to dismiss [6] is DENIED as moot. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
Under Rule 41(a)(2):
an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper. If a defendant has pleaded a counterclaim before being served with the plaintiff's motion to dismiss, the action may be dismissed over the defendant's objection only if the counterclaim can remain pending for independent adjudication. Unless the order states otherwise, a dismissal under this paragraph (2) is without prejudice.This case is properly dismissed with prejudice since Alsuwaylimi no longer wishes to pursue his claims and concedes dismissal would serve the interests of justice. And the docket reflects that the defendants have not asserted a counterclaim; had they, their lack of response to Alsuwaylimi's motion to dismiss indicates their lack of objection.
SO ORDERED, this 19th day of January, 2024.