Filed: Aug. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 29, 2016
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL OF THE ENTIRE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE Docket No. 50. EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Plaintiffs initiated this personal injury asbestos action in state court against more than fifty different companies. See Docket No. 1 (complaint). Defendant Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation removed the case to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1442(a)(1). 1 See Docket No. 1 (notice of removal). A total of nine def
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL OF THE ENTIRE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE Docket No. 50. EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Plaintiffs initiated this personal injury asbestos action in state court against more than fifty different companies. See Docket No. 1 (complaint). Defendant Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation removed the case to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1442(a)(1). 1 See Docket No. 1 (notice of removal). A total of nine defe..
More
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL OF THE ENTIRE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Docket No. 50.
EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs initiated this personal injury asbestos action in state court against more than fifty different companies. See Docket No. 1 (complaint). Defendant Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation removed the case to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1).1 See Docket No. 1 (notice of removal). A total of nine defendants have made an appearance before this Court. Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' ex parte application for an order granting dismissal of the entire action, without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) (providing that "an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper"; also providing that, "[u]nless the order states otherwise, a dismissal under this paragraph (2) is without prejudice").
According to Plaintiffs, before filing the pending application, they contacted "all active Defendants" and asked for a stipulation of dismissal. App. at 3. Only two of the "active" defendants declined, namely, Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation and John Crane, Inc. Plaintiffs therefore filed the pending application. Via ECF. Plaintiffs gave notice of the application to those defendants who have appeared in this action, which includes Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation and John Crane, Inc. Plaintiffs also informed many, but not all, of the remaining defendants of their intent to file the application by letter. See Blumenfeld James Decl., Ex. 1 (letter).
The Court has received no opposition to Plaintiffs' application from any defendant, including Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation and John Crane, Inc. Although some defendants were not notified of Plaintiffs' application or their intent to file the application, those defendants have not made an appearance in this litigation. The Court discerns no prejudice to defendants from dismissal. Taking into account the above circumstances, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs' application. The instant case is dismissed, and without prejudice.
This order disposes of Docket No. 50.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
