Kumar

Kumar v. Bardini

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 21, 20241:23-cv-01658California276 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 11 KULDEEP KUMAR, Case No. 1:23-cv-01658-NODJ-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE TO CLOSE v. CASE AND ADJUST THE DOCKET TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL EMILIA BARDINI, et al., PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Defendants. (ECF No. 8)

17 On February 16, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the entire action without prejudice. (ECF No. 9.) Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “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)). In light of the notice of dismissal, this action has…

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.