AYALA v. CyberPOWER SYSTEMS (USA), 15-cr-1196 MJD/FLN. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Minnesota
Number: infdco20151023k35
Visitors: 2
Filed: Oct. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 21, 2015
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS , District Judge . The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on CyberPower Systems (USA), Inc.'s ("CyberPower") objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel dated September 8, 2015 recommending that the Court deny its motion to dismiss. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based on that review, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendat
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS , District Judge . The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on CyberPower Systems (USA), Inc.'s ("CyberPower") objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel dated September 8, 2015 recommending that the Court deny its motion to dismiss. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based on that review, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendati..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL J. DAVIS, District Judge.
The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on CyberPower Systems (USA), Inc.'s ("CyberPower") objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel dated September 8, 2015 recommending that the Court deny its motion to dismiss.
Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based on that review, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation and deny CyberPower's motion to dismiss. The portion of the Report and Recommendation addressing Defendant Insperity PEO Services, L.P.'s motion to dismiss is moot, as Plaintiff has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with respect to this Defendant.1
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant CyberPower's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 17) is DENIED; and
2. Defendant Insperity's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 30) is dismissed as moot.
FootNotes
1. Defendant Insperity PEO Services objects to the notice of dismissal, which dismissed the claims without prejudice, given the fact that the Magistrate Judge had issued a Report and Recommendation recommending the motion be granted and the claims dismissed against Defendant Insperity with prejudice. The applicable Rules provide, however, that a plaintiff may file a notice of dismissal without leave of court before a defendant either files an answer or motion for summary judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 (a)(1). A motion to dismiss does not trigger court approval prior to dismissal. See Safeguard Bus. Sys., Inc. v. Hoeffel, 907 F.2d 861 (1990) (finding that a preliminary ruling from the court on motion for temporary restraining order did not prevent plaintiff from voluntarily dismissing action without prior court approval).
Source: Leagle
