From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gray v. 1000 Pacheco Rd. Apartments, Llc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 30, 2015
Case No.: 1:14-cv-00987 (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)

Opinion

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00987

07-30-2015

ARTHUR GRAY, Plaintiff, v. 1000 PACHECO ROAD APARTMENTS, LLC., Defendant.


ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT TO CLOSE THIS ACTION PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL (Doc. 24)

On July 30, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation seeking to dismiss the action. (Doc. 24) The stipulation relies upon Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, under which "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." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). Once such a notice has been filed, an order of the Court is not required to effectuate the dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. 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)(1)(A)(ii).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 30 , 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Gray v. 1000 Pacheco Rd. Apartments, Llc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 30, 2015
Case No.: 1:14-cv-00987 (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)
Case details for

Gray v. 1000 Pacheco Rd. Apartments, Llc.

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR GRAY, Plaintiff, v. 1000 PACHECO ROAD APARTMENTS, LLC., Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 30, 2015

Citations

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00987 (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)