Avalos v. Tusan Family Partners, LP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE AVALOS, Case No. 1:20-cv-01742-NONE-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET

v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

TUSCAN FAMILY PARTNERS, LP, (ECF No. 10)

Defendant.

This action was filed on December 10, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) On February 2, 2021, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

“[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’ ” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). The Ninth Circuit has held that Rule 41(a) allows a plaintiff to dismiss without a court order any defendant who has yet to serve an answer or motion for summary judgment. Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609 (9th Cir. 1993). “[A] dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to do anything about it.” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc., 193 F.3d at 1078. In this action, defendant has not filed an answer or other responsive pleading, therefore this action has been dismissed with prejudice and without an award of costs or expenses.

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to assign a district judge to this case for the purpose of closing the case and then to adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED. OF a Se g | Dated: _February 2, 2021 __ OF

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE