Nam Ba Nguyen v. Westminster Police Department

C.D. California

Nam Ba Nguyen v. Westminster Police Department

DecidedNovember 10, 2022

Docket8:22-cv-01930

StatusUnknown

This text of Nam Ba Nguyen v. Westminster Police Department (Nam Ba Nguyen v. Westminster Police Department) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nam Ba Nguyen v. Westminster Police Department, (C.D. Cal. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

Case 8:22-cv-01930-DOC-PLA Document 5 Filed 11/10/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:20

1 2 3 JS-6 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SOUTHERN DIVISION 11 12 NAM BA NGUYEN, ) No. SA CV 22-1930-DOC (PLA) ) 13 Plaintiff, ) ORDER CLOSING CASE ) 14 v. ) ) 15 WESTMINSTER POLICE ) DEPARTMENT, et al., ) 16 ) Defendants. ) 17 ) 18 I. 19 BACKGROUND 20 On October 21, 2022, plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights action herein pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 21 § 1983 (“Complaint”). Plaintiff also filed a Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees 22 (“IFP Request”). (ECF No. 2). The Court has not yet ruled on the IFP Request. 23 On November 8, 2022, plaintiff filed a “Motion to Withdraw” (“Motion” (ECF No. 4)), in which 24 he states that he “request[s] to withdraw the entire case,” because he is “currently under Mental 25 Health treatment.” (Mot. at 1). The Court construes plaintiff’s Motion to be notice of voluntary 26 dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 27 Rule 41 allows for the voluntary dismissal of an action by a plaintiff without prejudice and 28 without a court order before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary Case 8:22-cv-01930-DOC-PLA Document5 Filed 11/10/22 Page2of2 Page ID#:21

4 | judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman Am. Express, Inc., 813 F.2d 1532, 9|| 1534 (9th Cir. 1987). Defendants have not yet appeared in this action. 3 Accordingly, based on plaintiffs Motion, the Court finds that dismissal of the action is 4| warranted. 5 Il. 6 ORDER 7 As Rule 41 (a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits plaintiff to dismiss the action g| even without a court order since no answer has been served, the Court hereby dismisses the g | Complaint without prejudice. This case is closed.

14) DATED: —November 10.2022 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Case 8:22-cv-01930-DOC-PLA Document 5 Filed 11/10/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:20

1 2 3 JS-6 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SOUTHERN DIVISION 11 12 NAM BA NGUYEN, ) No. SA CV 22-1930-DOC (PLA) ) 13 Plaintiff, ) ORDER CLOSING CASE ) 14 v. ) ) 15 WESTMINSTER POLICE ) DEPARTMENT, et al., ) 16 ) Defendants. ) 17 ) 18 I. 19 BACKGROUND 20 On October 21, 2022, plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights action herein pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 21 § 1983 (“Complaint”). Plaintiff also filed a Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees 22 (“IFP Request”). (ECF No. 2). The Court has not yet ruled on the IFP Request. 23 On November 8, 2022, plaintiff filed a “Motion to Withdraw” (“Motion” (ECF No. 4)), in which 24 he states that he “request[s] to withdraw the entire case,” because he is “currently under Mental 25 Health treatment.” (Mot. at 1). The Court construes plaintiff’s Motion to be notice of voluntary 26 dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 27 Rule 41 allows for the voluntary dismissal of an action by a plaintiff without prejudice and 28 without a court order before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary Case 8:22-cv-01930-DOC-PLA Document5 Filed 11/10/22 Page2of2 Page ID#:21

4 | judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman Am. Express, Inc., 813 F.2d 1532, 9|| 1534 (9th Cir. 1987). Defendants have not yet appeared in this action. 3 Accordingly, based on plaintiffs Motion, the Court finds that dismissal of the action is 4| warranted. 5 Il. 6 ORDER 7 As Rule 41 (a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits plaintiff to dismiss the action g| even without a court order since no answer has been served, the Court hereby dismisses the g | Complaint without prejudice. This case is closed.

14) DATED: —November 10.2022 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Nam Ba Nguyen v. Westminster Police Department, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nam-ba-nguyen-v-westminster-police-department-cacd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack