1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NADIA IZADBAKHSH, Case No. 22-cv-0902-BAS-AHG

12 Plaintiff, ORDER CLOSING CASE 13 v. (ECF No. 6) 14 MERRICK GARLAND, Attorney

General of the United States, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to dismiss the case with prejudice 18 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (Joint Mot. ECF No. 6.) 19 Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss its 20 action by, inter alia, filing a notice of voluntary dismissal before a defendant has filed an 21 answer or moved for summary judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i); see also Wilson 22 v. City of San Jose,

(9th Cir. 1997). Dismissal is effective upon the 23 filing of such notice, and no court order is required. Stone v. Woodford, No. CIV-F-05- 24 845 AWI-DLB,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2007). A dismissal is without 25 prejudice unless the parties stipulate otherwise. 26 Because Defendant has yet to respond to Plaintiff’s Petition, the parties need not 27 seek permission from this Court to dismiss the instant action. See Fed. R. Civ. 41(a)(1)(B). 28 1 || Accordingly, the Court construes the Joint Motion as a Notice of Dismissal, DISMISSES 2 || WITH PREJUDICE the instant action, and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to close this 3 ||matter. (ECF No. 6.) 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. / , 5 || DATED: January 3, 2023 yi Ug (Lyohaa 6 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28