Elmer v. Hinkley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOHN ELMER, Case No. 1:24-cv-00871-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE HINKLEY AS A 13 v. DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION HINKLEY, et al., (ECF No. 26) 15 Defendants.

17 On March 6, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendant Hinkley without prejudice. (ECF No. 26.) Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all of the defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some or all of his claims—through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”)).

23 Defendant Hinkley has not filed an answer or a motion for summary judgment in this action. Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) a “plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

27 / / / / / / 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Hinkley as a defendant in | this action.

4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee | Dated: _ March 6, 2025 ; STANLEY A. BOONE 6 United States Magistrate Judge