Vahora v. Valley Diagnostic Laboratory Inc., 1:19-cv-00912-DAD-SKO. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190904611
Visitors: 5
Filed: Sep. 02, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 02, 2019
Summary: ORDER RE: DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF'S RECEIVERSHIP CLAIM (FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF) SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . On August 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of "Voluntary Dismissal of the First Cause of Action for a Receiver Without Prejudice Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)." (Doc. 16.) In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides as follows: "[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing. . . (ii) a notice of dismissal before the opposi
Summary: ORDER RE: DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF'S RECEIVERSHIP CLAIM (FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF) SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . On August 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of "Voluntary Dismissal of the First Cause of Action for a Receiver Without Prejudice Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)." (Doc. 16.) In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides as follows: "[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing. . . (ii) a notice of dismissal before the opposin..
More
ORDER RE: DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF PLAINTIFF'S RECEIVERSHIP CLAIM (FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF)
SHEILA K. OBERTO, Magistrate Judge.
On August 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of "Voluntary Dismissal of the First Cause of Action for a Receiver Without Prejudice Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)." (Doc. 16.)
In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides as follows: "[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing. . . (ii) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). "The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims" through a Rule 41(a)(1) stipulation. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Such stipulation may be made orally in open court. See Carter v. Beverly Hills Savings & Loan Association, 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986).
Because Plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed his receivership claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 66 (First Claim for Relief) (Doc. 1 ¶¶ 43-62), without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), and Defendant has not served an answer or a motion for summary judgment, that claim has been DISMISSED. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A).
This case shall remain OPEN pending resolution of Plaintiff's remaining claims against Defendant.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
