Garcia v. Praxair Inc.

Opinion

PATRICK GARCIA, Case No. 1:18-cv-01493-SAB Plaintiff, ORDER RE STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH y. PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF’S FIFTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION PRAXAIR, INC., (ECF No. 34) I5 Defendant. Patrick Garcia (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint in this action on October 29, 2018. On April 2, 2020, a stipulation to dismiss the fifth and sixth causes of action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)Cii) was filed. The Ninth Circuit has held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) cannot be used to dismiss individual claims against defendants, and that Rule 15 is the proper mechanism to do so. See Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (“In the specific context of Rule 41(a)(1), we have held that the Rule does not allow for piecemeal dismissals. Instead, withdrawals of individual claims against a given defendant are governed by [Rule 15].”); Ethridge v. Harbor House Rest., 861 F.2d 1389, 1392 (9th Cir. 1988) (holding a plaintiff cannot use Rule 41 “to dismiss, unilaterally, a single claim from a multi-claim complaint.”); but see Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997) (“The Plaintiff may dismiss

some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”). The Court finds it proper to construe the parties’ stipulation to dismiss the individual cause of action as consent to amend the complaint under Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Hells Canyon Pres. Council, 403 F.3d at 689 (“The fact that a voluntary dismissal of a claim under Rule 41(a) is properly labeled an amendment under Rule 15 is a technical, not a substantive distinction.”’) (quoting Nilssen v. Motorola, Inc., 203 F.3d 782, 784 (Fed. Cir. 2000)). Therefore, the Court will give full effect to the parties’ stipulation through a Rule 15 amendment. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to the parties’ stipulation the operative complaint filed October 29, 2018 (ECF No. 1) is DEEMED AMENDED and the fifth and sixth causes of action are no longer alleged against Defendant Praxair, Inc. b IT IS SO ORDERED. □□ (Se Dated: _ April 2, 2020 OF

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL Case No. 1:18-CV-01493-LJO-SAB WITH PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF’S FIFTH AND