Opinion
No. 2:19-cv-2409-MCE-EFB PS
07-31-2020
JOSE VELEZ, Plaintiff, v. TAMMY VANCE, FRANCISCO BOBADILLA, DEMETRIO NIEVES CORTES, HILARIO VELAZQUEZ, DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff filed this action against four defendants, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Unruh Civil Rights Act. ECF No. 1. After defendant Tammy Vance filed an answer to the complaint, plaintiff filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss this action with prejudice. ECF No. 5. Thereafter, Vance—the only defendant to have appeared in this action—was ordered to file, by no later than May 14, 2020, a document stipulating to the dismissal of this action, or otherwise respond to plaintiff's request for dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A) (an action may be dismissed without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal prior to a defendant serving an answer or by stipulation signed by all appearing parties). Vance was also notified that should she decline to stipulate to dismissal, the court could dismiss the action based upon plaintiff's request, "on terms that the court considers proper." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2).
The deadline has passed, and defendant Vance has not filed a stipulation or otherwise responded to plaintiff's motion. Furthermore, the court is not aware of any basis for denying plaintiff's request for dismissal of this case with prejudice.
Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's request to dismiss this action with prejudice (ECF No. 5) be granted, and the Clerk be directed to close the case.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: July 31, 2020.
/s/_________
EDMUND F. BRENNAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE