Elmer v. Hinkley

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 | JOHN ELMER, Case No. 1:24-cv-00871-SAB 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE CHRISTIAN 11 V. PFEIFFER AND ROB ST. ANDRE AS DEFENDANTS IN THIS ACTION 12 | HINKLEY, et al., (ECF No. 22) 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 On February 27, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendants Christian Pfeiffer 17 | and Rob St. Andre without prejudice. (ECF No. 22.) Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil 18 || Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all of the defendants in an action through a Rule 19 | 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Hells 20 | Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) 21 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Defendants Christian 22 | Pfeiffer and Rob St. Andre from this action without prejudice. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 FA. 95 | Dated: _ February 28, 2025 ; STANLEY A. BOONE 26 United States Magistrate Judge 27 28