Singh v. Bardini

District Court, E.D. California·Decided February 17, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-01202·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HARMANDEEFP SINGH, Case No. 1:22-cv-01202-ADA-SAB Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST THE Vv. DOCKET TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO RULE EMILIA BARDINI, et al., OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Defendants. (ECF No. 13) On February 16, 2023, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal. (ECF No. 13.) In light of the notice of dismissal, this action has been terminated, Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)Gii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997), and has been dismissed without prejudice, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to close the case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. 53 Dated: _February 17, 2023 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

Singh v. Bardini, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Singh v. Bardini (Singh v. Bardini) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. City of San Jose
111 F.3d 688 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)