Opinion
2:23-cv-00225 KGB
08-28-2024
CHARLES WILLIAM FAASSEN PLAINTIFF v. JUSTIN CARTER LARRY DEFENDANT
ORDER
KRISTINE G. BAKER, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is plaintiff Charles William Faassen's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 5). Mr. Faassen's attorney, Keith Garrett, acknowledges the Court's Order directing him to refile his motion for admission pro hac vice and affirms his intent to comply with Local Rule 83.5(d) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas (Id.). The Court construes this affirmation, along with Mr. Garrett's previous motion, to constitute a valid motion for admission pro hac vice and permits Mr. Garrett to represent Mr. Faassen in this matter. However, Mr. Faassen now wishes to dismiss without prejudice the action due to an inability to serve the defendant (Id.). Mr. Faassen's dismissal complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The Court grants Mr. Faassen's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 5). The Court dismisses without prejudice the action and denies as moot the first motion to extend time (Dkt. No. 3).
So ordered this 28th day of August, 2024.