From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Urista v. Midland Funding, LLC

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 17, 2021
1:21-cv-00429-NE-SKO (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2021)

Opinion

1:21-cv-00429-NE-SKO

08-17-2021

YAZMIN GARCIA URISTA, Plaintiff, v. MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS MATTER AND CLOSE THE CASE (DOC. 12)

SHEILA K. OBERTO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On August 16, 2021, the parties filed a joint stipulation, signed by all parties who have appeared, that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 12.)

In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A) provides as follows:

[A] 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). Rule 41 thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all the parties who have appeared, although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986).

Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made in open court, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Case law concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval. Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999). Because the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) that is signed by all whom have made an appearance, this case has terminated. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court SHALL assign a district judge to this matter and thereafter CLOSE the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Urista v. Midland Funding, LLC

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 17, 2021
1:21-cv-00429-NE-SKO (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2021)
Case details for

Urista v. Midland Funding, LLC

Case Details

Full title:YAZMIN GARCIA URISTA, Plaintiff, v. MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Aug 17, 2021

Citations

1:21-cv-00429-NE-SKO (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2021)

Citing Cases

Garcia v. Harley-Davidson Motor Co. Grp.

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Plaintiffs, Ronald Garcia and Michael Harrison and Defendant,…