Anthony Bailey v. Jeremy Bean, et al.

Opinion

ANTHONY BAILEY, Case No.: 2:25-cv-02233-CDS-BNW ‘ Plaintiff, 5 ORDER DENYING UNSIGNED v. MOTION JEREMY BEAN, et al., (ECF No. 3) ’ Defendants. 9 This action began with an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a pro se 42 U.S.C. 10} § 1983 civil-rights complaint filed by state prisoner Anthony Bailey. ECF Nos. □□ 1-1. On 11} December 9, 2025, Baily filed a document titled “Voluntary Dismissal Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Fed. R. Civ. P.” ECF No. 3. Ordinarily, the filing of a voluntary dismissal under Federal 13} Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(1) operates to terminate the case without further order of the court when, like here, no party has served either an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Fed. R. 15} Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(a)(); accord Duke Energy Trading & Marketing, LLC v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1049 (9th Cir. 2001) (reiterating that Rule 41(a)(1)() dismissal has the effect that no case was 17 brought and terminates the court’s jurisdiction over the claims). But Bailey’s document did not have that effect because he did not sign it. See ECF No. 3 at 1. Bailey merely signed the certificate 19 of service, see ECF No. 3 at 2, which is not sufficient. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 (a) (an unrepresented 20 party must personally sign every pleading, motion, or similar paper submitted to the court). 21 It is therefore ordered that Bailey’s unsigned motion to voluntarily dismiss this action 1s 22} denied without prejudice. If Bailey wishes to voluntarily dismiss this action, then he must file a 23 signed notice under 41(a)(1)(a)(1) to that effect. 24 DATED: December 18, 2025 25 26 Boemnbentesta UNI ATES MAGIS TE JUDGE 28