Surrender Kumar v. Connie Nolan, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: October 3, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00632
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SURENDER KUMAR, Case No. 1:25-cv-00632-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 13 TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 14 CONNIE NOLAN, et al., (ECF No. 8) 15 Defendants. 16 17 On October 1, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the entire action 18 without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 19 “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 20 action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’” 21 Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999), 22 quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). “[A] dismissal under 23 Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no 24 action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to 25 do anything about it.” Id. at 1078; see also Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609 (9th Cir. 1993). 26 In this action, no defendant has filed an answer, other responsive pleading, or motion for 27 summary judgment. / / / 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to CLOSE the file in this 2 | case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. Se 5 | Dated: _ October 3, 2025 " STANLEY A. BOONE 6 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 28