Shergill

Gilbert v. Shergill

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 23, 20221:22-cv-00413California344 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARREN GILBERT, Case No. 1:22-cv-00413-DAD-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE

COURT TO TERMINATE NAJAR A.

v. SHERGILL AS A DEFENDANT IN THIS

ACTION

NAJAR A. SHERGILL, et al., (ECF No. 11) Defendants.

16 On May 20, 2022, the parties filed a stipulated notice of dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) of Defendant Najar A. Shergill dba Quick N Save. (ECF No. 11.) The dismissal of this Defendant is without prejudice. (Id.) The claims against the other named Defendants are not subject to the stipulation and will remain active. (Id.) 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…

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.