Elmer

Elmer v. Hinkley

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 20251:24-cv-00871California199 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8 JOHN ELMER, Case No. 1:24-cv-00871-SAB Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE

COURT TO TERMINATE CHRISTIAN

V. PFEIFFER AND ROB ST. ANDRE AS

DEFENDANTS IN THIS ACTION

HINKLEY, et al., (ECF No. 22) Defendants. 14 15 On February 27, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendants Christian Pfeiffer and Rob St. Andre without prejudice. (ECF No. 22.) 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 Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Defendants Christian 22 Pfeiffer and Rob St. Andre from this action without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FA. Dated: _…

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.