ORDER

WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR., District Judge.

Before the Court are Defendants' Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 185) and Plaintiffs' Consent Motion to Dismiss Corizon, LLC (Doc. 263). After careful consideration, these motions are granted.

In Defendants' Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings, Defendants assert that the Court should dismiss all claims against Defendants Frederick Burke, Mark Capers, Maxine Evans, Andrew Evans-Martinez, Debra Johnson, Jason Kenny, and Eric Vinson brought against them in their official capacities. Defendants contend that all claims against these Defendants, who are all correctional officers, in their official capacities are duplicative of claims already raised against Sheriff Wilcher. In their view, these claims should be dismissed because they are redundant and wholly unnecessary. See Busby v. City of Orlando, 931 F.2d 764, 776 (11th Cir. 1991) ("To keep the City and the officers sued in their official capacity as defendants in this case would have been redundant and possibly confusing to the jury."). In response, Plaintiffs concede that any claims against these Defendants in their official capacities should be dismissed. (Doc. 227.)

Because the parties are in agreement and the Court concurs that these claims are unnecessary, Defendants' Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 185) is GRANTED. To the extent that any claims exist against these named Defendants in their official capacities, those claims are dismissed. To the extent any claims are brought against these Defendants in their individual capacities, however, these claims remain.1

In the Plaintiffs' Consent Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiffs request that this Court dismiss Corizon, LLC from this action without prejudice. (Doc. 263.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), a party that has already filed an answer can be dismissed from an action "at the plaintiff's request only by court order." In deciding whether to voluntarily dismiss a party from an action the Court must consider whether the party will suffer any specific prejudice from such a dismissal. Fisher v. Puerto Rico Marine Mgmt., Inc., 940 F.2d 1502, 152-03 (11th Cir. 1991). At this time, the Court cannot discern any prejudice that Defendant Corizon, LLC would suffer as a consequence of being dismissed from this action. Moreover, Defendant Corizon, LLC has not opposed Plaintiffs' request. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Consent Motion to Dismiss Corizon, LLC (Doc. 263) is GRANTED. Defendant Corizon, LLC is DISMISSED from this action.

SO ORDERED.