Opinion
2:21-cv-7893-PA (MAR)
01-18-2022
RAFAEL MARTIROSYAN, Plaintiff, v. L.A.S.D., ET AL., Defendants.
HONORABLE MARGO A. ROCCONI UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ORDER RE: VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
ANDERSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Rafael Martirosyan (“Plaintiff”), a California inmate proceeding pro se, currently has two (2) cases pending before this Court: (1) Martirosyan v. Baries, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-6433-PA (MAR) (C.D. Cal.); and the instant action, (2) Martirosyan v. L.A.S.D., et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-7893-PA (MAR) (C.D. Cal.). The Court originally construed Plaintiff's filing in the instant action as instigating a new and distinct action from Martirosyan v. Baries, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-6433-PA (MAR) and docketed it as such. Plaintiff has since clarified that Plaintiff did not intend to start a new action with the instant complaint, but instead only as an update to Plaintiff's previous complaint in Martirosyan v. Baries, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-6433-PA (MAR). See Martirosyan v. L.A.S.D., et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-7893-PA (MAR), Dkt. 5. Specifically, Plaintiff explains:
Plaintiff Rafael Martirosyan . . . at first deems it appropriate to do the clarification to the specific inquiry made by the court regarding the mail sent out on Sept. 22, '21 by [Plaintiff]. [Plaintiff] states that the intent was
not to file a separate complaint, but rather inform the court of events/updates/facts in regards to the complaint initially filed 21-cv-6433-PA (MAR).Id. at 2.
The Court construes Plaintiffs letter as a notice of voluntary dismissal as described in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (a)(1) (A) (i) (“Rule 41(a)”). Accordingly, the action is DISMISSED, without prejudice. Plaintiff is advised that, in light of this dismissal, all Defendants included in the instant complaint are terminated. If Plaintiff still wishes to move forward with the claims against these Defendants, Plaintiff should refer to the Court's instructions in Plaintiffs first action, Martirosyan v. Baries, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-6433-PA (MAR).
Because Plaintiff is voluntarily dismissing this action, Plaintiffs pending Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees, Dkt. 2, is DENIED as moot.
Pursuant to Rule 41(a), a court order dismissing the case is not necessary here, as the opposing parties have not yet appeared. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41 (a)(1)(A)(i). However, given the lack of clarity surrounding the instant complaint, the Court is issuing the instant Order to avoid any potential confusion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.