From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hanna v. Stinn

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 24, 2024
2:24-cv-00546-FLA (BFMx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2024)

Opinion

2:24-cv-00546-FLA (BFMx)

06-24-2024

BISHOY HANNA, Plaintiff, v. JOSH FREEMAN STINN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE

FERNANDO L. AENLLE-ROCHA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

On January 22, 2024, Plaintiff Bishoy Hanna (“Plaintiff” or “Hanna”) in pro se filed the Complaint in this action, asserting three causes of action against Defendants the Honorable Josh Freeman Stinn (“Judge Stinn”), Crystal Boultinghouse (“Boultinghouse”), and Sarah Gianella (“Giannella”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Dkt. 1. On March 18, 2024, Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), asserting five causes of action for: (1) conspiracy; (2) violation of due process; (3) violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962; (4) malicious prosecution; and (5) discrimination in violation of the equal protection clause. Dkt. 25 (“FAC”).

Plaintiff dismissed Defendants Giannella, Boultinghouse, and Judge Stinn from this action on June 13, 19, and 20, 2024, respectively, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a). Dkts. 55, 57, 58. As Plaintiff has dismissed all Defendants from this action, the court DISMISSES the action in its entirety, without prejudice. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1). Judge Stinn's Motion to Dismiss the FAC (Dkt. 28) is DENIED without prejudice as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hanna v. Stinn

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 24, 2024
2:24-cv-00546-FLA (BFMx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2024)
Case details for

Hanna v. Stinn

Case Details

Full title:BISHOY HANNA, Plaintiff, v. JOSH FREEMAN STINN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 24, 2024

Citations

2:24-cv-00546-FLA (BFMx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2024)