Patrick v. Atlantic Animal Health, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION KATHLEEN PATRICK, Plaintiff, Vv. Case No. 6:24-cv-2067-JA-RMN ATLANTIC ANIMAL HEALTH, INC. and NEOGEN CORP., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff and Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. have filed a Stipulation of Dismissal (Doc. 67), purporting to dismiss all claims against ‘Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. and citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)Gi) as the basis for the Stipulation. Rule 41(a)(1)(A)@1i) provides that “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing ... a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)Gi). But the Stipulation (Doc. 67) is signed only by Plaintiff and Defendant Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. rather than “by all parties who have appeared” as required by Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). See Hardnett v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 21-13195, 2023 WL 2056285 (11th Cir. 2023); see also City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hosp. Holdings, L.P., 82 F.4th 1031 (11th Cir. 2023). Thus, the Stipulation is not effective to dismiss

Plaintiffs claims against Atlantic Animal Health, Inc. All claims in this case remain pending. cA DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on HN ANTOON II United States District Judge Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record