Sokolskyfilm Inc v. The Sorrento Hotel Partnership

W.D. Washington

Sokolskyfilm Inc v. The Sorrento Hotel Partnership

DecidedMay 14, 2025

Docket2:24-cv-01702

StatusUnknown

This text of Sokolskyfilm Inc v. The Sorrento Hotel Partnership (Sokolskyfilm Inc v. The Sorrento Hotel Partnership) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sokolskyfilm Inc v. The Sorrento Hotel Partnership, (W.D. Wash. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6 AT SEATTLE 7 SOKOLSKYFILM INC., 8 Plaintiff, 9 v. C24-1702 TSZ 10 THE SORRENTO HOTEL MINUTE ORDER PARTNERSHIP, 11 Defendant. 12

13 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge: 14 (1) Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (“Notice”), docket no. 13, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Under that rule, a plaintiff 15 may dismiss an action without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal “before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. 16 P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Once a defendant serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment, however, the plaintiff may no longer voluntarily dismiss under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). See 17 Langere v. Verizon Wireless Servs., LLC, 983 F.3d 1115, 1118 n.2 (9th Cir. 2020); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). 18 Defendant served an answer on Plaintiff, see Answer at 10 (docket no. 10), and 19 Defendant did not sign the Notice. Accordingly, the Notice fails to meet the requirements of either Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or (ii). See Allstate Vehicle & Prop. Insurance 20 Co. v. Richardson, 2024 WL 5008859, at *1 (E.D. Wash. Dec. 6, 2024). However, Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, docket no. 13, will be treated as a motion to 21 dismiss under Rule 41(a)(2). Pursuant to that Rule, “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. 22 Civ. P. 41(a)(2). Defendant may respond to Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. If 1 the Court receives no response or Defendant does not object by May 23, 2025, the Court will enter an order dismissing this case with prejudice. 2 (2) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of 3 record. Dated this 13th day of May, 2025. 4 5 Ravi Subramanian Clerk 6 s/Laurie Cuaresma 7 Deputy Clerk 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

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

1 2

3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6 AT SEATTLE 7 SOKOLSKYFILM INC., 8 Plaintiff, 9 v. C24-1702 TSZ 10 THE SORRENTO HOTEL MINUTE ORDER PARTNERSHIP, 11 Defendant. 12

13 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge: 14 (1) Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (“Notice”), docket no. 13, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Under that rule, a plaintiff 15 may dismiss an action without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal “before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. 16 P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Once a defendant serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment, however, the plaintiff may no longer voluntarily dismiss under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). See 17 Langere v. Verizon Wireless Servs., LLC, 983 F.3d 1115, 1118 n.2 (9th Cir. 2020); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). 18 Defendant served an answer on Plaintiff, see Answer at 10 (docket no. 10), and 19 Defendant did not sign the Notice. Accordingly, the Notice fails to meet the requirements of either Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or (ii). See Allstate Vehicle & Prop. Insurance 20 Co. v. Richardson, 2024 WL 5008859, at *1 (E.D. Wash. Dec. 6, 2024). However, Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, docket no. 13, will be treated as a motion to 21 dismiss under Rule 41(a)(2). Pursuant to that Rule, “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. 22 Civ. P. 41(a)(2). Defendant may respond to Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. If 1 the Court receives no response or Defendant does not object by May 23, 2025, the Court will enter an order dismissing this case with prejudice. 2 (2) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of 3 record. Dated this 13th day of May, 2025. 4 5 Ravi Subramanian Clerk 6 s/Laurie Cuaresma 7 Deputy Clerk 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Sokolskyfilm Inc v. The Sorrento Hotel Partnership, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sokolskyfilm-inc-v-the-sorrento-hotel-partnership-wawd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack