Filed: Jul. 10, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 10, 2012
Summary: ORDER THOMAS B. SMITH, Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Uncontested Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 16). Pursuant to M.D. FLA. R. 3.01(g), counsel for Plaintiff represents that Defendant's attorney has been contacted and has no objection to the dismissal. Plaintiff further represents that Defendant has agreed that each party "would be responsible for their own costs associated with this action." ( Id. ). Upon due consideration, the undersigned will construe the uncontested m
Summary: ORDER THOMAS B. SMITH, Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Uncontested Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 16). Pursuant to M.D. FLA. R. 3.01(g), counsel for Plaintiff represents that Defendant's attorney has been contacted and has no objection to the dismissal. Plaintiff further represents that Defendant has agreed that each party "would be responsible for their own costs associated with this action." ( Id. ). Upon due consideration, the undersigned will construe the uncontested mo..
More
ORDER
THOMAS B. SMITH, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Uncontested Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 16). Pursuant to M.D. FLA. R. 3.01(g), counsel for Plaintiff represents that Defendant's attorney has been contacted and has no objection to the dismissal. Plaintiff further represents that Defendant has agreed that each party "would be responsible for their own costs associated with this action." (Id.).
Upon due consideration, the undersigned will construe the uncontested motion as the joint stipulation of the parties, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). Pursuant to this stipulated dismissal, the undersigned finds that there is no prevailing party in this action and an award of Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA") fees would be inappropriate under these circumstances. See Ruiz v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 189 F. App'x. 112, 113 (3d. Cir. 2006) ("A district court may also enter a voluntary dismissal on the stipulation of the parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), in which case no EAJA fee award is appropriate, as there is no prevailing party.") (citing Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 102-03 (1991)).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's uncontested motion (Doc. 16) is GRANTED.
2. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
3. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
