Block

Block v. California-Fresno Investment Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 25, 20231:22-cv-01419California332 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HENDRIK BLOCK, Case No. 1:22-cv-01419-JLT-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO TERMINATE CEDAR PLAZA, INC. AS

v. DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION

CALIFORNIA-FRESNO INVESTMENT (ECF No. 21)

COMPANY,

13 Defendant. 14 On July 24, 2023, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) as to the dismissal of Defendant Cedar Plaza, Inc. (ECF No. 21.) The dismissal of this Defendant is without prejudice. (Id. at 1.) The claims against the other named Defendant are not subject to the stipulation and will remain active. 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 41(a)(1) notice.”)); Hells…

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.