Laurino v. United States Postal Service

Opinion

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARICELA LAURINO, Case No. 1:18-cv-00636-JLT-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER ENTERING STIPULATED 12 DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AND v. DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 TERMINATE PLAINTIFFS MARICELA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, LAURINO, IRMA JURADO, VIVIAN 14 JURADO, AND YVETTE JURADO Defendant. 15 ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFFS PATRICIA JURADO, JOEL JURADO, AND 16 MANUEL JURADO, JR. TO SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD 17 NOT BE IMPOSED WITHIN FIVE DAYS

18 (ECF Nos. 80, 81)

19 This consolidated action proceeds with two sets of Plaintiffs against Defendant United 20 States of America. A settlement conference was held on May 23, 2022, before Magistrate Judge 21 Carolyn Delaney, at which the parties reached a settlement agreement and were to file 22 dispositional documents within thirty days. (ECF No. 79.) On June 24, 2022, Maricela Laurino, 23 Irma Jurado, Vivian Jurado, and Yvette Jurado (the “Laurino Plaintiffs”) filed a stipulation of 24 dismissal as to their claims against Defendant. (ECF No. 80.) On the same date, Defendant 25 United States filed an ex parte request for a fifteen (15) day extension of time to file 26 dispositional documents as to the claims asserted by Patricia Jurado, Joel Jurado, and Manuel 27 Jurado, Jr. (the “Jurado Plaintiffs”). (ECF No. 81.) The United States’ filing indicates that on 1 May 25, 2022, it transmitted the settlement agreement to counsel for the Jurado Plaintiffs by 2 email, and Plaintiffs’ counsel indicated they would get the necessary signatures; on June 22, 3 2022, the United States emailed counsel for the Jurado Plaintiffs but as of June 24, 2022, the 4 United States did not receive a response; on June 24, 2022, counsel for the United States sent a 5 draft stipulation to dismiss, and attempted to call counsel for the Jurado Plaintiffs, but as of the 6 filing of the request, received no response. (ECF No. 81.) On June 27, 2022, Magistrate Judge 7 Delaney granted the request for an extension of time to file dispositional documents until July 8, 8 2022. 9 Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all 10 of the defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 11 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The 12 plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some or all of his claims—through 13 a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”)); but see Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 14 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (The Ninth Circuit has “only extended the rule to allow the dismissal of 15 all claims against one defendant, so that a defendant may be dismissed from the entire action.”). 16 “Filing a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court automatically terminates the action as to 17 the defendants who are the subjects of the notice.” Concha, 62 F.3d at 1506. 18 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these 19 Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 20 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to 21 control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 22 including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 23 2000). 24 The Court will enter the stipulation of dismissal as to Laurino Plaintiffs and Defendant. 25 Once a stipulation of dismissal is entered as to the Jurado Plaintiffs, the Court will then direct the 26 Clerk of the Court to close this case. Magistrate Judge Delaney already extended the deadline to 27 file dispositional documents, however, the Court shall also order the Jurado Plaintiffs to show 1 | documents by the deadline to do so. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The claims between Plaintiffs Maricela Laurino, Irma Jurado, Vivian Jurado, and 4 Yvette Jurado, and Defendant United States of America, are dismissed pursuant to 5 their stipulation of dismissal; 6 2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Plaintiffs Maricela Laurino, 7 Irma Jurado, Vivian Jurado, and Yvette Jurado, as parties to this action; and 8 3, Plaintiffs Patricia Jurado, Joel Jurado, and Manuel Jurado, Jr., shall show cause in 9 writing within five (5) days of the date of entry of this order why monetary 10 sanctions should not issue for the failure to file dispositional documents by the 11 deadline to do so. 12 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 14 | Dated: _ June 27, 2022

Is UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28