From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Navarro v. Daveiga

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 13, 2021
1:20-cv-00810-JLT (PC) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2021)

Opinion

1:20-cv-00810-JLT (PC)

08-13-2021

MARIO LOUIS NAVARRO, Plaintiff, v. DAVEIGA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO CLOSE CASE

JENNIFER L. THURSTON CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The parties have filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). (Doc. 293.) The rule provides that a “plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Once a dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is properly filed, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal; the dismissal is effective automatically. See Com. Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1078 (9th Cir. 1999). Because the parties have filed a stipulation of dismissal, signed by all parties or their counsel of record, this case has ended. Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Navarro v. Daveiga

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 13, 2021
1:20-cv-00810-JLT (PC) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2021)
Case details for

Navarro v. Daveiga

Case Details

Full title:MARIO LOUIS NAVARRO, Plaintiff, v. DAVEIGA, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Aug 13, 2021

Citations

1:20-cv-00810-JLT (PC) (E.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2021)