UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

PATRICIA MERCADO, Case No. 2:25-cv-00069-BLW

Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER v.

GREGORY A. ROSENBLUM,

Defendant.

Patricia Mercado filed a notice of voluntary dismissal purporting to voluntarily dismiss this case without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). Dkt. 8. Rule 41(a)(1) permits a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss a case without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves an answer or motion for summary judgment, or with the consent of all parties that have appeared in the action. When, as here, the defendant has already filed an answer and does not consent to the dismissal, a plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal may be granted only “upon order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper.” Fed. R. Civ. 41(a)(2). “A district court should grant a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) unless a defendant can show that it will suffer some plain legal prejudice as a result.” Smith v. Lenches,

, 975 (9th Cir. 2001) (citations omitted).

The Court will construe Ms. Mercado’s notice of voluntary dismissal as a motion for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) and grant the motion. The defendant, Greg Rosenblum, has not had the opportunity to file any response to

Ms. Mercado’s motion; however, the Court need not wait to resolve the motion. Mr. Rosenblum will not suffer any prejudice from the dismissal because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Ms. Mercado’s complaint alleges diversity jurisdiction as the basis for this

Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. See Dkt. 2 at 1. Diversity jurisdiction requires that the parties have complete diversity and that the amount in controversy be at least $75,000.

. Although the parties are completely diverse—

meaning they are citizens of different states—the amount in controversy is only $45,464.62. Dkt. 2 at 4. This amount is insufficient to meet the threshold for diversity jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and will dismiss this case without prejudice pursuant to Ms. Mercado’s request.

ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Voluntary Dismissal (Dkt. 8) is GRANTED and this case is dismissed without prejudice. 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

a DATED: June 4, 2025 of, J | NS > B. Lynn Winmill Cr U.S. District Court Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 3