Handian

Handian v. Shepard

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 19, 20231:22-cv-01280California337 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HAROUT HANDIAN, Case No. 1:22-cv-01280-ADA-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE

COURT TO TERMINATE SUSAN WARD

v. TARNER AS DEFENDANT IN THIS

ACTION

MARK SCOTT SHEPARD, et al., (ECF No. 25) Defendants.

16 Plaintiff initiated this action on October 7, 2022. (ECF No. 1.) On March 15, 2023, default was entered against Defendant Susan Ward Turner. (ECF No. 19.) On April 18, 2023, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of Defendant Susan Ward Tarner. (ECF No. 25.) The other named Defendant Mark Scott Shepard is not subject to the notice. (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.