1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KELLY HAYMOND, individually and on Case No. 1:23-cv-00334-ADA-CDB behalf of all others similarly situated, 12 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT Plaintiffs, 13 TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST THE v. DOCKET TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY 14 DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO RULE LOVEVERY, INC., 41(a)(1)(A)(i) OF THE FEDERAL RULES 15 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Defendant. 16 (Docs. 25) 17 ORDER DIRECTING TERMINATION OF 18 PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT

19 (Docs. 13, 14, 20, 21)

20 21 Plaintiff Kelly Haymond (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Lovevery, Inc. 22 (“Defendant”) on March 3, 2023. (Doc. 1). On May 26, 2023, Plaintiff filed the operative first 23 amended complaint. (Doc. 17). On June 9, 2023, Defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration 24 and motion to dismiss. (Docs. 20-21). On July 3, 2023, the parties filed a stipulation to stay this 25 action. (Doc. 23). The Court granted the parties’ request to stay on July 5, 2023. (Doc. 24). 26 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 27 41(a), in which Plaintiff notices dismissal of her individual claims with prejudice and putative 28 1 class members’ claims without prejudice. (Doc. 25).1 2 Plaintiff is entitled to dismiss her individual claims with prejudice and without court order 3 because her filing is made before Defendant served either an answer or motion for summary 4 judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 5 In a class action, however, court approval of dismissal may be required under Rule 6 41(a)(2) if the class has been certified. Specifically, Rule 23(e) provides that any claims arising 7 out of either a (1) “certified class” or (2) “class proposed to be certified for purposes of 8 settlement ... may be settled, voluntarily dismissed, or compromised only with the court’s 9 approval.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) (emphasis added). 10 In this case, Plaintiff seeks to dismiss the putative class claims under Rule 41(a)(1) 11 without prejudice. This case is in the initial stages, and thus, Plaintiff has not sought certification. 12 Indeed, as noted above, Defendant has not answered and the case has not convened for a 13 scheduling conference. Thus, while the case is a putative class action, no class has yet been 14 certified, nor is certification being proposed for purposes of settlement. 15 Because no class has been certified in this case, and because any dismissal without 16 prejudice would not affect putative class members’ claims, Rule 23(e) does not mandate either 17 Court approval of the parties’ settlement or notice to putative class members. See Titus v. 18 BlueChip Financial,

, 695 (9th Cir. 2019) (“Because no class has been 19 certified, Titus is the only plaintiff before the court; once she has dismissed her claims with 20 prejudice, no other plaintiff can step into her shoes to continue this legal action”) (unpublished) 21 (citing Emp’rs-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Pension Tr. Fund v. Anchor Capital Advisors, 22

(9th Cir. 2007)). 23 In light of Plaintiff’s filing that is consistent with Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) and the Court’s 24 finding above that under the circumstances, Rule 23(e) does not require Court approval of the 25 dismissal, this action has been terminated by operation of law without further order of the Court. 26 Comm. Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1999). 27

28 1 On July 31, 2023, the Court erroneously entered an order characterizing Plaintiff’s notice 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to CLOSE the file in this 2 | case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 3 | )ADQ). 4 By this closure, Defendant’s pending motions (Docs.13, 14, 20, 21) are MOOT. 5 | IT IS SO ORDERED. ° Dated: _ August 2, 2023 | Word bo 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28