Atain Specialty Insurance Co. v. Isom

Full title: ATAIN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. HARVEY ISOM dba FAR WEST…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 14, 2015

1:14-cv-1336-BAM (E.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2015)

Opinion

ATAIN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. HARVEY ISOM dba FAR WEST PLUMBING, CENTURY BUILDERS, LLC, a California limited liability company, CENTURY DEVELOPERS, LLC, a California limited liability company, NIBCO, INC., a foreign corporation licensed to do business in the State of California, Defendants. No. 1:14-cv-1336-BAM United States District Court, Eastern District of California January 14, 2015

          ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE CASE

          BARBARA A. MCAULIFFE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         On January 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed a joint stipulation of voluntary dismissal, with prejudice, signed by all parties to this action. (Doc. 19). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A), in relevant part, provides:

[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action with 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.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A).

         Rule 41(a)(1)(B) further provides that a dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A) is without prejudice "[u]nless the notice or stipulation states otherwise." Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) thus allows a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss an action with prejudice by filing a written stipulation to that effect signed by all parties who have appeared in the action. Such a stipulation of dismissal is self-executing and does not require an order of the court to effectuate dismissal. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 147 (9th Cir. 1986) (Rule 41(a)(1) provides for dismissal by the plaintiff without order of the court by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action); DeLeon v. Marcos, 659 F.3d 1276, 1283 (10th Cir. 2011) ("A stipulation of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or (ii) is self-executing and immediately strips the district court of jurisdiction over the merits."); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989) ("[c]aselaw concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval") (parentheses in original) (citation omitted); Casida v. Sears Holding Corp, No. 1:11-cv-1052-AWI-JLT, 2013 WL 1314051, at *1 (E.D. Cal. April 1, 2013) (the filing of stipulation for dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) terminates the action).

         Given that Plaintiff has filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice signed by all parties to this action, this case is terminated. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to ADMINISTRATIVELY close this case.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.