Taylor v. Taylor

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDWARD T. TAYLOR, III, et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00325-NONE-SAB Plaintiffs, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL STEPHANIE J. TAYLOR, et al., (ECF No. 7)

Defendants.

This action was filed on March 4, 2021. (ECF No. 1.) On April 23, 2021, a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was filed. As the document was filed as a motion to dismiss, a minute order was inadvertently entered continuing the scheduling conference to December 7, 2021. “[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, no defendant has filed an answer or other responsive pleading. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. All pending dates are VACATED;

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to assign a district judge to this case for the purpose of closing the case; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le

Dated: _ April 23, 2021 _ OO

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE