Reeve v. Synchrony Bank

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: June 17, 2025
• Docket: 1:24-cv-01458
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 WILLIAM REEVE, Case No. 1:24-cv-01458-JLT-EPG 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS SYNCHRONY BANK AND EQUIFAX 12 v. INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, REGARDING STIPULATION OF DISMISAL 13 SYNCHRONY BANK, et al., (ECF No. 52) 14 Defendants. 15 16 On June 17, 2025, Plaintiff William Reeve and Defendant Experian Information 17 Solutions, Inc., filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice of the claims against these 18 Defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. However, because Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) 19 requires a stipulation of dismissal to be “signed by all parties who have appeared,” and only 20 Plaintiff and Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc., have signed the stipulation, the 21 Court will require the remaining Defendants in the case who have appeared—Defendants 22 Synchrony Bank and Equifax Information Services, LLC—to submit a filing approving or 23 opposing the stipulation of dismissal. See Thacker v. AT&T Corp., No. 2:20-CV-00255-KJM- 24 CKD PS, 2021 WL 1784873, at *1 (E.D. Cal. May 5, 2021), report and recommendation 25 adopted, 2021 WL 4168533 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2021) (noting that court was “unaware of any 26 case waiving the requirement that the stipulation . . . must be made by all parties who have 27 appeared” and that “[t]he requirement to obtain all parties’ consent to voluntarily dismiss (without 28 a court order) is intended to ensure that a voluntary dismissal of a party at later stages of the 1 | litigation does not cause plain legal prejudice to the party to be dismissed or to the remaining 2 | defendant(s)”). 3 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 4 1. By no later than June 27, 2025, Defendants Synchrony Bank and Equifax Information 5 Services, LLC, shall file a signed document reflecting their approval of the stipulation of 6 dismissal (ECF No. 52) or file a response opposing the stipulation of dismissal. 7 2. Alternatively, by no later than June 27, 2025, the parties may file a stipulation of dismissal 8 signed by all parties who have appeared in this action in compliance with Rule

9 A4l(a)(1)(A) Gi). 10 | Tr IS SO ORDERED. 11 15 | Dated: _Sune 17, 2025 [sf ey — UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28