Ammerman v. JPMCB Card Services

• Court: District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
• Decided: September 18, 2025
• Docket: 5:25-cv-00525
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

BRADLEY AMMERMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-25-525-SLP ) JPMCB CARD SERVICES, ) ) Defendant. )

O R D E R

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 8] brought “pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure[.]” Plaintiff states that he “no longer wishes to pursue this action” and seeks dismissal without prejudice. [Doc. No. 8] at 1. Where, as here, a notice of voluntary dismissal is filed before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) confers upon a plaintiff the “absolute right to dismiss without prejudice and no action is required on the part of the court.” Janssen v. Harris, 321 F.3d 998, 1000 (10th Cir.2003). Accordingly, although he cites Rule 41(a)(2), the Court construes Plaintiff’s Motion as a notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i).1 “Once the notice of dismissal has been filed, the district court loses jurisdiction over the dismissed claims and may not address the merits of such claims or issue further orders pertaining to them.” Janssen, 321 F.3d at 1000 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

1 Even if considered as a motion, the Court would grant the motion and dismiss this action, as there is no prejudice to Defendant associated with dismissal at this juncture. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED this 18" day of September, 2025. Laz bop SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE