Brooke

Brooke v. Stan Express LP

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 12, 20211:21-cv-00957California358 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THERESA BROOKE, Case No. 1:21-cv-000957-NONE-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN DISTRICT

v. JUDGE FOR PURPOSES OF CLOSING

CASE AND TO ADJUST DOCKET TO

STAN EXPRESS LP, REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

Defendant. (ECF No. 4)

16 This action was filed on June 16, 2021. (ECF No. 1.) On July 8, 2021, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice 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…

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.