From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clayton v. Synchrony Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 15, 2017
Case No.: 1:16-cv-01241 JLT (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2017)

Opinion

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01241 JLT

02-15-2017

LAURENCE CLAYTON, Plaintiff, v. SYNCHRONY BANK, Defendant.


ORDER CLOSING CASE (Doc. 17 )

On February 10, 2017, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Doc. 17) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 41 provides that "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 . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). Once such a notice has been filed, an order of the Court is not required to make the dismissal effective. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this action in light of the notice of dismissal with prejudice filed and properly signed pursuant to Rule 41(a). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 15 , 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Clayton v. Synchrony Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 15, 2017
Case No.: 1:16-cv-01241 JLT (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2017)
Case details for

Clayton v. Synchrony Bank

Case Details

Full title:LAURENCE CLAYTON, Plaintiff, v. SYNCHRONY BANK, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 15, 2017

Citations

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01241 JLT (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2017)