From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garcia v. Cal. State Superior Courts

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 20, 2018
No. 1:18-cv-01369-JLT (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2018)

Opinion

No. 1:18-cv-01369-JLT (PC)

11-20-2018

PAUL CARLOS GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA STATE SUPERIOR COURTS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER CLOSING THE CASE DUE TO PLAINTIFF'S VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

(Doc. 9)

On November 15, 2018, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(i). (Doc. 9.)

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 defendant has answered the complaint or filed a motion for summary judgment. Because Plaintiff has exercised his right to voluntarily dismiss the complaint under Rule 41(a)(1), this case has terminated. See Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692.

Since this action has terminated pursuant to Plaintiff's request to voluntarily dismiss this action in accordance with Rule 41(a)(1)(i), the Clerk is ordered to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 20 , 2018

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Garcia v. Cal. State Superior Courts

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 20, 2018
No. 1:18-cv-01369-JLT (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2018)
Case details for

Garcia v. Cal. State Superior Courts

Case Details

Full title:PAUL CARLOS GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA STATE SUPERIOR COURTS, et…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 20, 2018

Citations

No. 1:18-cv-01369-JLT (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2018)