Escobedo v. Buffet Concepts, Inc.

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 JOSE ESCOBEDO, Case No. 1:24-cv-01153-KES-SAB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST THE 13 v. DOCKET TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a) 14 BUFFET CONCEPTS, INC., et al., OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 15) 16 17 On March 17, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of this action with prejudice in its 18 entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 15.) 19 “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 20 action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’” 21 Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999), 22 quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). “[A] dismissal under 23 Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no 24 action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to 25 do anything about it.” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc., 193 F.3d at 1078; see also Pedrina v. 26 Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609 (9th Cir. 1993). In this action, no defendant has filed an answer, other 27 responsive pleading, or motion for summary judgment. 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to CLOSE the file in this 2 | case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 5 | Dated: _ March 18, 2025 STANLEY A. BOONE 6 United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28