From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Chevron Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION
Dec 20, 2011
No. 11-MC-7003-TC (D. Or. Dec. 20, 2011)

Opinion

11-MC-7003-TC

12-20-2011

CHEVRON CORPORATION, Petitioner, To Issue Subpoenas For The Taking Of Depositions And the Production Of Documents.


ORDER

COFFIN, Magistrate Judge:

On November 1, 2011 Chevron Corporation filed an application under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to conduct discovery from Environmental Law Alliance (ELAW) to use in foreign proceedings. (# 1). Both parties have consented to magistrate jurisdiction. Currently before me is Chevron's notice of voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(a)(l)(A)(i), which ELAW opposes. (#s31,32). ELAW argues that I should treat Chevron's notice of voluntary dismissal as a request for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) and dismiss this matter with prejudice with fees and costs to ELAW. Fed. R. Civ, P, 4(a)(l)(A)(i) provides that a plaintiff has an absolute right to dismiss a case without prejudice prior to a defendant filing an answer or responsive motion for summary judgment. The Ninth Circuit has held a plaintiffs absolute right under Rule 41 (a)(1) to voluntarily dismiss an action when the defendant has not yet served an answer or a motion for summary judgment leaves no rule for the court to play, stating:

I note that in its response, Chevron committed to covering the costs and fees ELAW incurred-as of December 5, 2011, in connection with responding to this action. (#33 at 3).

The language of rule 41(a)(1) is unequivocal. It permits a plaintiff to dismiss an action "without order of court."... "Th[e] [filing of notice] itself closes the file. There is nothing the defendant can do to fan the ashes of that action into life and the court has no role to play. This is a matter of right running to the plaintiff and may not be extinguished or circumscribed by adversary or court. There is not even a perfunctory order of court closing the file. Its alpha and omega was the doing of the plaintiff alone. He suffers no impairment beyond his fee for filing."
American Soccer Co., Inc. v. Score First Enterprises, 187 F.3d 1108, 1110 (9th Cir. 1999). (internal citations omitted). Here, a review of the docket reveals that ELAW has filed neither an answer nor a responsive pleading. Accordingly, Chevron's notice of voluntary dismissal dismissed this action without prejudice. I am without jurisdiction to consider ELAW's objections.

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter an order dismissing this action without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED

THOMAS M. COFFIN

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

In re Chevron Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION
Dec 20, 2011
No. 11-MC-7003-TC (D. Or. Dec. 20, 2011)
Case details for

In re Chevron Corp.

Case Details

Full title:CHEVRON CORPORATION, Petitioner, To Issue Subpoenas For The Taking Of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION

Date published: Dec 20, 2011

Citations

No. 11-MC-7003-TC (D. Or. Dec. 20, 2011)