Scanlon
Scanlon v. Curtis International, Ltd.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROMAN SCANLON, No. 1:19-cv-00937-LJO-SKO Plaintiff, v. ORDER RE: DISMISSAL WITHOUT
PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF’S UNJUST
CURTIS INTERNATIONAL, LTD., ENRICHMENT CLAIM (FIFTH CLAIM FOR
TECHNICOLOR SA, RELIEF)
15 Defendants.
17 On October 23, 2019, Plaintiff filed a “Notice of Dismissal of Count V (Unjust Enrichment) Without Prejudice.” (Doc. 20.) In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides as follows: “[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing. . . (ii) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). “The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims” through a Rule 41(a)(1) stipulation. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Such stipulation may be made orally in open court. See Carter v. Beverly Hills Savings & Loan Association, 884…