Ortiz
Ortiz v. Ortiz
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOSE ORTIZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01416-AWI-SAB
Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT
TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET
v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
FANNY ORTIZ, et al., (ECF No. 7) Defendants.
16 Jose Ortiz (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner, is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’ ” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). The Ninth Circuit has held that Rule 41(a) allows a plaintiff to dismiss without a court order any defendant who has yet to serve…