Richey v. Getwellnetwork, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIKA KATHLEEN RICHEY, an ) Case No.: 3:20-cv-02205-BEN-BLM individual, on behalf of herself and all ) others similarly situated, ) ORDER GRANTING JOINT ) MOTION TO DISMISS

Plaintiff, ) v. ) [ECF No. 12] )

GETWELLNETWORK, INC., a ) foreign corporation; SEAN )

THOMPSON, an individual; and )

DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, )

Defendant. )

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Erika Kathleen Richey (“Plaintiff”) brings this wrongful termination and discrimination action against Defendants Sean Thompson, an individual; GetWellNetwork, Inc., a foreign corporation (“GetWellNetwork”) (collectively, “Defendants”); and Does 1 through 100. ECF No. 1. Before the Court is the Joint Motion of Plaintiff and Defendants (collectively, the “Parties”) to Dismiss the Entire Action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 41(a)(2)”). ECF No. 12. After considering the papers submitted, supporting documentation, and applicable law, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion.

BACKGROUND

The background of this case was detailed in Richey v. GetWellNetwork, Inc., No. 320CV02205BENBLM, 2021 WL 424281, at *1-2 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2021). Most recently, on February 8, 2021, the Parties filed the instant Joint Motion, stipulating to (1) the voluntary dismissal with prejudice of all of Plaintiff's individual claims for relief and each party bearing that party’s own attorneys’ fees and costs. ECF No. 12 at 1-5. LEGAL STANDARD g Where a plaintiff does not proceed by filing a notice or stipulation of dismissal, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” FED. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2); see also Smith v. Lenches, 263 F.3d 972, 975 (9th Cir. 2001) (providing that a “district court should grant a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) unless a defendant can show that it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as result”); Hamilton v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 679 F.2d 143, 145 (9th Cir. 1982) (moting that “plain legal prejudice does not result merely because the defendant will be inconvenienced by having to defend in another forum or where a plaintiff would gain a tactical advantage by that dismissal”). A dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) by court order is 1g || without prejudice “[u]nless the order states otherwise.”

ORDER

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), the Parties jointly move to dismiss this enter action with ||prejudice. Having read and considered the Joint Motion submitted by Plaintiff and 49, || Defendants, and good cause appearing, the Joint Motion is GRANTED as follows: 73 1. Plaintiff's claims against Defendants are dismissed in their entirety as to all 94 claims for relief with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2).

95 2. Each party is to bear its own costs, fees, and expenses. %6 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5g || DATED: March 3, 2021 A

HON. ROGER T. BENIT 2. United States District Judge