From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diamond v. Mosby

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Apr 25, 2024
No. C22-1808JLR (W.D. Wash. Apr. 25, 2024)

Opinion

C22-1808JLR

04-25-2024

GAIL K. DIAMOND, Plaintiff, v. JOHN MOSBY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

JAMES L. ROBART, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the court is pro se Plaintiff Gail K. Diamond's motion to dismiss this action without prejudice. (Mot. (Dkt. # 30).) The deadline to respond to the motion has passed and Defendants John Mosby, Michael Pham, and Jennifer Sandler (“Defendants”) have not filed any opposition papers.(See generally Dkt.) Accordingly, the court exercises its discretion to rule on the motion before the noting date. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 1 (stating that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should be construed “to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”).

The court construes Defendants' failure to timely respond as “an admission that the motion has merit.” See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(b)(2).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) authorizes the court to dismiss an action without prejudice at the plaintiff's request “on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2). The court has reviewed the motion and concludes that dismissal is appropriate. The court therefore GRANTS Ms. Diamond's motion (Dkt. # 30) and DISMISSES this action without prejudice.


Summaries of

Diamond v. Mosby

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Apr 25, 2024
No. C22-1808JLR (W.D. Wash. Apr. 25, 2024)
Case details for

Diamond v. Mosby

Case Details

Full title:GAIL K. DIAMOND, Plaintiff, v. JOHN MOSBY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Apr 25, 2024

Citations

No. C22-1808JLR (W.D. Wash. Apr. 25, 2024)