Weekly v. United States of America

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: June 16, 2022
• Docket: 1:22-cv-00341
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 FRANKLIN BIRL WEEKLY, Case No. 1:22-cv-00341-JLT-SAB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE DEFENDANTS 13 v. CITY OF FRESNO AND COUNTY OF FRESNO AS DEFENDANTS IN THIS 14 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., ACTION

15 Defendants. (ECF No. 13)

16 17 On June 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendants City of Fresno and 18 County of Fresno, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). (ECF No. 13.) Defendants 19 United States of American ad the California Department of Public Health are not addressed in 20 the filing. Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or 21 all of the defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 22 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) 23 (“The plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some or all of his claims— 24 through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”)); but see Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 25 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (The Ninth Circuit has “only extended the rule to allow the 26 dismissal of all claims against one defendant, so that a defendant may be dismissed from the 27 entire action.”). “Filing a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice.” Concha, 62 F.3d at 1506. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to 2 | terminate Defendants City of Fresno, and County of Fresno, as parties in this action. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 5 Dated: _ June 16, 2022

‘ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28