1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00570-NODJ-SAB

12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE DEAN 13 v. ARMANDO AS A PARTY IN THIS ACTION 14 CREEK MANUFACTURING LLC, et al., (ECF No. 59) 15 Defendants.

16 17 On December 7, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a notice of dismissal of Defendant Dean Armando 18 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 59.) Rule 41(a) of the 19 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all of the defendants in an 20 action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose,

(9th Cir. 21 1997); see also Concha v. London,

(9th Cir. 1995) (“The plaintiff may 22 dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some or all of his claims—through a Rule 23 41(a)(1) notice.”)); but see Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv.,

, 687 24 (9th Cir. 2005) (The Ninth Circuit has “only extended the rule to allow the dismissal of all claims 25 against one defendant, so that a defendant may be dismissed from the entire action.”). “Filing a 26 notice of voluntary dismissal with the court automatically terminates the action as to the 27 defendants who are the subjects of the notice.” Concha,

. / / / 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Defendant Dean 2 | Armando as a defendant in this action. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 5 | Dated: _ December 8, 2023

‘ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28