Maria Ruiz de Martinez v. Aramark Services, Inc., et al.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Maria Ruiz de Martinez v. Aramark Services, Inc., et al.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MARIA RUIZ DE MARTINEZ, Case No. 1:24-cv-00625-JLT-EPG 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT ARAMARK SERVICES, INC. TO SUBMIT 12 v. FILING REGARDING STIPULATION OF DISMISAL 13 ARAMARK SERVICES, INC., et al., (ECF No. 45) 14 Defendants.

15 16 17 On November 17, 2025, Plaintiff and Defendant National Park Service filed a stipulation 18 of dismissal without prejudice of the claims against Defendant National Park Service under 19 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). However, because Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) requires a 20 stipulation of dismissal to be “signed by all parties who have appeared,” the Court will also 21 require Defendant Aramark Services, Inc. to submit a filing approving or opposing the stipulation 22 of dismissal. See Thacker v. AT&T Corp., No. 2:20-CV-00255-KJM-CKD PS,

2021 WL 23

1784873, at *1 (E.D. Cal. May 5, 2021), report and recommendation adopted,

2021 WL 4168533

24 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2021) (noting that court was “unaware of any case waiving the requirement 25 that the stipulation . . . must be made by all parties who have appeared” and that “[t]he 26 requirement to obtain all parties’ consent to voluntarily dismiss (without a court order) is intended to ensure that a voluntary dismissal of a party at later stages of the litigation does not cause plain 27 legal prejudice to the party to be dismissed or to the remaining defendant(s)”). 28 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 2 1. By no later than November 25, 2025, Defendant Aramark Services, Inc. shall file a signed 3 document reflecting its approval of the stipulation of dismissal (ECF No. 45) or file a 4 response opposing the stipulation of dismissal. 5 2. Alternatively, by no later than November 25, 2025, the parties may file a stipulation of 6 dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in this action in compliance with Rule 7 41(a)(1)(A) qi). 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 19 | ___ Dated: November 18, 2025 [lee Fahey — UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown