Jose Escobedo v. Irma Pimentel d/b/a Mariscos El Tarasco, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: September 18, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00692
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE ESCOBEDO, Case No. 1:25-cv-00692-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 12 TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 13 IRMA PIMENTEL d/b/a MARISOCOS EL (ECF No. 13) 14 TARASCO, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 On September 18, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the entire action 18 with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 19 13.) 20 “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action 21 prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’” Commercial 22 Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Wilson 23 v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). “[A] dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is 24 effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no action had been 25 brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to do anything 26 about it.” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc., 193 F.3d at 1078. In this action, no defendant has 27 filed an answer or other responsive pleading. 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to CLOSE the file in this case 2 adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1). 3 4 T IS SO ORDERED. FA. Se 5 Dated: _ September 18, 2025 " STANLEY A. BOONE 6 United States Magistrate Judge 4 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28