(PC) Chavez v. Kings County

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PABLO CHAVEZ, Case No. 1:20-cv-00471-SKO (PC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF 13 v. THE COURT TO CLOSE CASE

14 KINGS COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On April 20, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be 18 dismissed as duplicative. (Doc. 6.) The Court informed Plaintiff that, in the alternative, he may 19 file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id.) 20 On April 27, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of this case. (Doc. 7.) 21 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) provides that a “plaintiff may dismiss an action without 22 a court order by filing … a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer 23 or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Once a dismissal under Rule 24 41(a)(1) is properly filed, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal; the dismissal 25 is effective automatically. Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1078 (9th 26 Cir. 1999). 27 /// /// 1 Because Plaintiff has filed a notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1), and no opposing 2 party has appeared in this case, this action has terminated. Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the 3 Clerk of the Court to close this case. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5

Sheila K. Oberto 6 Dated: May 5, 2020 /s/ . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27