Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01613/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01613-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 15:2(a) Fair Labor Standards Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

On September 3, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case under Rule 

41(a)(1)(A)(ii), with the Plaintiffs’ individual claims being dismissed with prejudice and the 

putative class claims being dismissed without prejudice. See Doc. No. 30. 

 Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads: 

(A) . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a 

notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion 

for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who 

have appeared. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the 

dismissal is without prejudice. 

Dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), when properly filed, are effective immediately and do not 

require a court order/court approval. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Yesh Music v. Lakewood 

Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 

NATHANIEL J. TAYLOR and HARRY L. 

HARRISON, individually and on behalf of 

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ALLIED BARTON SECURITY 

SERVICES LP, and DOES 1-10 inclusive,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:13-CV-01613-AWI-SKO 

 

ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE 

Case 1:13-cv-01613-AWI-SKO Document 44 Filed 09/04/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); In re 

Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989). 

Here, all parties who have appeared in this case signed the stipulated dismissal. Because 

all parties have signed the stipulated dismissal, this case has terminated automatically. See id. 

 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall CLOSE this case in light of the 

parties’ properly filed and signed Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) Stipulation Of Dismissal, which dismissed 

the individual Plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice and the putative class action claims without 

prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 4, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:13-cv-01613-AWI-SKO Document 44 Filed 09/04/15 Page 2 of 2