1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 EMMA DUNN and ALANA DUNN, Case No. 1:25-cv-00565 JLT BAM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF ALANA DUNN’S NOTICE OF DISMISSAL 11 v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND DENYING REQUEST FOR REFUND 12 MARCLITE ELECTRICAL CORPORATION FLORIDA, et al., (Doc. 29) 13 Defendants. 14 15 Emma Dunn and Alana Dunn, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action against 16 defendants on May 12, 2025. On November 7, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiffs leave to amend 17 and directed Plaintiffs to file their second amended complaint within thirty days. (Doc. 15.) The 18 order sent to Emma Dunn was returned as “Undeliverable, Return to Sender, Attempted – Not 19 Know, Unable to Forward” on November 24, 2025.1 (See Docket.) 20 On November 24, 2025, Plaintiff Alana Dunn filed a document titled “Dismissal without 21 Prejudice.” (Doc. 16.) Plaintiff states that she does not “have time to put a fight in court” and she 22 therefore asks for a refund of her filing fee. (Id.) 23 The Court construes Plaintiff Alana Dunn’s filing as a notice of voluntary dismissal 24 without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), which permits a plaintiff to

25 1 Plaintiff Emma Dunn is required to keep the Court apprised as to her current address. Local Rule 183 provides:

26 A party appearing in propria persona shall keep the Court and opposing parties advised as to his or her current address. If mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by 27 the U.S. Postal Service, and if such plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within thirty (30) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice 28 for failure to prosecute. 1 | dismiss an action without a court order by filing “‘a notice of dismissal before the opposing party 2 | serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(i). Plaintiff 3 | Alana Dunn has stated her intent to dismiss this case without prejudice and no defendant has filed 4 | an answer or motion for summary judgment. However, Emma Dunn also is pursuing claims in 5 | this action. As a result, the notice of voluntary dismissal is only proper and effective as to Alana 6 | Dunn’s action against defendants. 7 To the extent Alana Dunn requests a refund of the filing fee for this action, her request 8 | will be denied. The Court is unable to return the filing fee. “[V]Joluntary dismissal of an action... 9 | does not entitle the litigant to a refund of filing fees.” See Silva v. Jackson, No. 1:25-cv-00458- 10 | KES-EPG,

, *1 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2025) (quoting Grindling v. Martone, No. 11 | 12-00361 LEK/BMK,

, at *2 (D. Haw. Sept. 28, 2012)); Hardy v. Stokes, No. 12 |} 2:24-cv-1798 DJC AC P,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2025) (noting “courts have 13 |} generally denied requests for refunds after the commencement of a case, even when the case has 14 | been voluntarily dismissed by plaintiff”); Lopez v. Doe, No. 5:23-cv-01924-FWS-AJR,

| 5422706, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 29, 2024) (collecting cases and noting multiple courts have found 16 | there is no statutory basis or precedent for returning a filing fee to a pro se plaintiff). Thus, the 17 | Court ORDERS: 18 1. Alana Dunn’s action against defendants is terminated by operation of law without 19 further order from the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)Q). 20 2. Alana Dunn’s request for a refund of the filing fee is DENIED. 21 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate only Alana Dunn on the docket and the 22 matter remains open. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. os | Dated: _ December 2, 2025 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 26 27 28