Zanoni

(PC) Smith v. Zanoni

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 5, 20241:24-cv-00161California496 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEREK SMITH, No. 1:24-cv-00161-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

TERMINATE ACTION PURSUANT TO

13 v. PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY

DISMISSAL

14 JOHN ZANONI, (ECF No. 8) 15 Defendant.

16

17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 18

U.S.C. § 1983.

19 On April 4, 2024, Plaintiff filed a request to voluntarily dismiss this action pursuant to 20 Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 8.) 21 Plaintiff has a right to voluntarily dismiss this case under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of 22 Civil Procedure. In Wilson v. City of San Jose, the Ninth Circuit explained: 23

24 Under Rule 41(a)(1), 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. Concha v. 25 London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman American Express,…

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.