Opinion
1:22-cv-01569-JLT-SAB
11-09-2023
JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. GREG RODRIGUEZ, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE DISPOSITIONAL DOCUMENTS, DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, AND DISMISSING ACTION PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL (ECF Nos. 59, 60, 61)
On October 4, 2023, this matter was settled at a settlement conference at least as to some named parties, and dispositional documents were to be filed withing thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 58.) On November 7, 2023, the Court issued an order to show cause as neither dispositional documents, nor a request for extension, was filed by the deadline. (ECF No. 59.)
On November 7, 2023, counsel for Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause indicating that: the parties were working on draft settlement agreements after the date of settlement; the final drafts of these agreements were emailed by defense counsel on October 23, 2023; after receipt of the final drafts, Plaintiff's counsel worked diligently to obtain client signatures, and obtained the client's signature on October 24, 2023; counsel for Plaintiff emailed the executed settlement agreement to defense counsel on October 25, 2023; counsel for Plaintiff has requested a fully executed copy of the Settlement Agreement and Release prior to filing dismissal documents, but has not been provided a fully executed copy as of today's date; counsel for Plaintiff has indicated that he will sign and return dismissal documents as soon as Jane Doe receives a copy of the fully executed settlement agreement; counsel for Plaintiff respectfully requests an additional 30 days to file dismissal documents as it is unknown when a fully executed copy will be provided; and counsel will immediately sign and return dispositional documents upon receipt of the fully executed settlement agreement. (ECF No. 60 at 1-2.)
While Defendants have not directly provided a response to the order to show cause, in light of the Plaintiff's filing, and the stipulation of dismissal immediately filed thereafter by Defendants, discussed next, the Court shall discharge the order to show cause. However, in most cases, the Court would not discharge an order to show cause until all parties have explained their positions.
On November 8, 2023, a stipulation of dismissal was filed pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 61.) The stipulation is filed by counsel for Plaintiff, and by counsel for all Defendants, including Defendant Greg Rodriguez. The filing provides that the stipulating parties agree to dismissal of this action and all claims and causes of action with prejudice, and with the parties to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees.
Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, ‘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.' ” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). Additionally, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides that a “plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
In light of the stipulation of the parties, this action has been terminated, Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997), and has been dismissed with prejudice and without an award of costs or attorneys' fees.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The order to show cause issued on November 7, 2023, (ECF No. 59), is DISCHARGED;
2. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file dispositional documents is GRANTED; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE the file in this case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.