Escamilla

Escamilla v. State of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 11, 20241:24-cv-00364California324 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRANDON MIGUEL ESCAMILLA, Case No. 1:24-cv-00364-KES-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE

COURT TO TERMINATE STATE OF

v. CALIFORNIA AND CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., REHABILITATION AS PARTIES IN THIS

ACTION

Defendants. (ECF No. 12) 15 On June 10, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendants State of California and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation without prejudice and without an award of fees or costs pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 11.) Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all of the defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some or all of his claims—through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”). …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.