From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mrozek v. Cal. Dept. of Corr. & Rehab.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 19, 2016
CASE NO. 1:16-CV-0325 AWI EPG (E.D. Cal. Jul. 19, 2016)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:16-CV-0325 AWI EPG

07-19-2016

BRAD MROZEK, Plaintiff v. CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, Defendants


ORDER ON MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, ORDER ON FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, AND ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE (Doc. No. 4, 9, 10)

On March 7, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. See Doc. No. 4. On June 14, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that this case be dismissed for failure to obey a court order. See Doc. No. 9. On July 18, 2016, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice. See Doc. No. 10.

Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

(A) . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without 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. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice.
Dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), when properly filed, are effective immediately and do not require a court order/court approval. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Yesh Music v. Lakewood Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).

Here, no answers to Plaintiff's complaint and no motions for summary judgment have been filed in this case, and it appears that no such documents have been served. Because Plaintiff has exercised his right to voluntarily dismiss his complaint without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1), this case has terminated automatically. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i); Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692. Because this case has terminated, the pending documents and motions are moot.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 4) is DENIED as moot; 2. The June 14, 2016 Findings and Recommendation (Doc. No. 9) is DENIED as moot; and 3. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case in light of Plaintiff's Rule 41(a)(1) voluntary dismissal without prejudice (Doc. No. 10). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 19, 2016

/s/_________

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Mrozek v. Cal. Dept. of Corr. & Rehab.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 19, 2016
CASE NO. 1:16-CV-0325 AWI EPG (E.D. Cal. Jul. 19, 2016)
Case details for

Mrozek v. Cal. Dept. of Corr. & Rehab.

Case Details

Full title:BRAD MROZEK, Plaintiff v. CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS AND…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 19, 2016

Citations

CASE NO. 1:16-CV-0325 AWI EPG (E.D. Cal. Jul. 19, 2016)