Williams v. Rama

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Williams v. Rama

Trial Court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AHKEEM WILLIAMS, Case No. 1:25-cv-00232-KES-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 12 TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 13 PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a) OF THE KAWEAH HEALTH MENTAL HEALTH, FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 14 Defendant. (ECF No. 24) 15 16 On August 5, 2025, Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss his claim, which the Court 17 construes as a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the 18 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 18.) 19 “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 20 action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’” 21 Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc.,

193 F.3d 1074, 1077

(9th Cir. 1999), 22 quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose,

111 F.3d 688

, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). “[A] dismissal under 23 Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no 24 action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to 25 do anything about it.” Id. at 1078; see also Pedrina v. Chun,

987 F.2d 608

, 609 (9th Cir. 1993). 26 The only remaining Defendant in this action, Kaweah Health Mental Health, has not filed an 27 answer or motion for summary judgment; thus, the notice of voluntary dismissal is effective under Rule 41(a)(1). 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to adjust the docket to 2 | reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule (a). 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 5 Dated: _ August 6, 2025 STANLEY A. BOONE 6 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

Reference

Status
Unknown