From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caballero v. Williams

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 18, 2021
2:21-cv-00638-KJM-CKD (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-00638-KJM-CKD

08-18-2021

Cesar Caballero, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Michael Williams, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

The plaintiffs have dismissed this action voluntarily under Rule 41. ECF No. 25. That dismissal is effective without a court order because no opposing party has served an answer or motion for summary judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The order to show cause at ECF No. 24 is therefore discharged, and the motions to intervene and consolidate at ECF Nos. 9, 10, 11, and 23 are denied as moot. See United States v. Ford, 650 F.2d 1141, 1143 (9th Cir. 1981) (“Since there is no longer any action in which [the proposed intervenor] can intervene, judicial consideration of the question would be fruitless.”); Melamed v. Blue Cross of California, No. 11-4540, 2012 WL 122828, at *7 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2012) (denying a motion to consolidate as moot following dismissal under Rule 41(a)), aff'd, 557 Fed.Appx. 659 (9th Cir. 2014). The clerk's office is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Caballero v. Williams

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 18, 2021
2:21-cv-00638-KJM-CKD (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2021)
Case details for

Caballero v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:Cesar Caballero, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Michael Williams, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Aug 18, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-00638-KJM-CKD (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2021)