UREÑA v. PELKIE, 14-cv-323-LM. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
Number: infdco20150901b18
Visitors: 12
Filed: Aug. 11, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 11, 2015
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ANDREA K. JOHNSTONE , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is plaintiff Felix Eliezer Ure a's notice of voluntary withdrawal of this action (doc. no. 24). The court construes the notice as a motion to allow Ure a to voluntarily dismiss this case, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ure a states that he does not wish to proceed with this case. Ure a's request to voluntarily dismiss this matter (doc. no. 24) should thus be granted, and
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ANDREA K. JOHNSTONE , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is plaintiff Felix Eliezer Ure a's notice of voluntary withdrawal of this action (doc. no. 24). The court construes the notice as a motion to allow Ure a to voluntarily dismiss this case, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ure a states that he does not wish to proceed with this case. Ure a's request to voluntarily dismiss this matter (doc. no. 24) should thus be granted, and t..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ANDREA K. JOHNSTONE, Magistrate Judge.
Before the court is plaintiff Felix Eliezer Ureña's notice of voluntary withdrawal of this action (doc. no. 24). The court construes the notice as a motion to allow Ureña to voluntarily dismiss this case, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ureña states that he does not wish to proceed with this case. Ureña's request to voluntarily dismiss this matter (doc. no. 24) should thus be granted, and the action should be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). Further, the pending motion for summary judgment (doc. no. 18), filed by defendants, which has been referred to this magistrate judge for a Report and Recommendation, pursuant to LR 72.1, should be denied as moot.
Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days of receipt of this notice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failure to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the district court's order. See United States v. De Jesús-Viera, 655 F.3d 52, 57 (1st Cir. 2011); Sch. Union No. 37 v. United Nat'l Ins. Co., 617 F.3d 554, 564 (1st Cir. 2010) (only issues fairly raised by objections to magistrate judge's report are subject to review by district court; issues not preserved by such objection are precluded on appeal).
Source: Leagle
