IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

STATESBORO DIVISION

CHARLIE LAMONTE MCKINNEY, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV 620-025 ) SERGEANT MULLINS; FNU JACKSON, ) Deputy Warden of Security; and FNU ) EPPERSON, Unit Manager, ) ) Defendants. ) _________

O R D E R _________ Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to amend the Court’s March 12, 2020 Order, wherein Plaintiff requests the Court amend its order to dismiss this case with prejudice instead of without prejudice. On March 12, 2020, the Court allowed Plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss this case without a Court order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (a)(1)(A)(i). (Doc. nos. 29-30.) A dismissal pursuant to Rule 41 (a)(1) is without prejudice and self-executing unless otherwise stated in the filing. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)-(B); First Classic, Inc. v. Jack Lake Prod., Inc., 674 F. App’s 911, 913 (11th Cir. 2017) (“A district court ‘need no and may not take action after the stipulation because effective because the stipulation dismisses the case an divests the district court of jurisdiction.” (quoting Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC,

(11th Cir. 2012)). The Court’s March 12th Order merely memorialized Plaintiff’s motion to voluntary dismiss, which did not specify whether Plaintiff wished to dismiss his case with or without prejudice. Because the presumption of dismissal is without prejudice and Plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal divested the Court of jurisdiction, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. (Doc. no. 31.) Notably, Plaintiff gains nothing from a dismissal with prejudice because it would prohibit him from filing a new lawsuit based on the same facts and claims while a dismissal without prejudice gives Plaintiff the freedom to decide on his own whether to file a second lawsuit. SO ORDERED this 28th day of April, 2020, at Augusta, Georgia.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA