Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05767/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05767-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARNETTE COLTAR,

Plaintiff,

v.

JACINTO, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 04 5767 AWI NEW (DLB) P

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

VOLUNTARILY DISMISS CASE (Doc. 25.)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

CLOSE CASE 

 Larnette Coltar (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On January 19, 2007, this Court issued its Third Order dismissing the Complaint with

leave to amend. In that Order, the Court informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies of his Complaint

and also granted her leave to cure these deficiencies in a Third Amended Complaint or move for

voluntary dismissal. On February 27, 2007, Plaintiff filed a pleading indicating that she wished

to voluntarily dismiss her case. 

“[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(I), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his

action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’”

Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999)

(quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). “[A] dismissal under

Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no

action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to

Case 1:04-cv-05767-AWI-LJO Document 26 Filed 03/05/07 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

do anything about it.” Id. at 1078. No defendant has filed an answer or other responsive

pleading.

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss her case is GRANTED; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE the file in this case and adjust

the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 5, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05767-AWI-LJO Document 26 Filed 03/05/07 Page 2 of 2