Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01919/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01919-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:0206 FLSA: Minimum Wage

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN METZGER and KRISTINA

METZGER, individually and on

behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 15cv1919-GPC(KSC)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’

MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT

TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE 41(a)(2)

[Dkt. Nos. 29, 31.]

v.

IMEDEX, INC., a corporation,

Defendant.

On August 31, 2015, Plaintiffs, with counsel, filed their complaint, individually

and behalf of all others similarly situated. (Dkt. No. 1.) Defendant filed an answer to

the complaint on February 16, 2016. (Dkt. No. 8.) On October 4, 2016, the Court

granted Plaintiffs’ counsel’s motion to withdraw. (Dkt. No. 28.) As such, on October

17, 2016, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 29.) 

On November 1, 2016, Plaintiffs John and Kristina Metzger, proceeding pro se,

filed a motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 31.) Once a

defendant has filed an answer, a plaintiff cannot dismiss without leave of court and

dismissal must be sought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 41(a)(2). 

Under Rule 41(a)(2), “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by

court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). The

district court has discretion whether to grant a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2). 

- 1 - [15cv1919-GPC(KSC)]

Case 3:15-cv-01919-GPC-KSC Document 32 Filed 11/01/16 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

Sams v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 625 F.2d 273, 277 (9th Cir. 1980). The Rule allows a

plaintiff to dismiss an action without prejudice as long as the defendant will not be

prejudiced or unfairly affected by the dismissal. Stevedoring Servs. of America v.

Armilla Intern’l B.V., 889 F.2d 919, 921 (9th Cir. 1989). After a review of the case,

and the pending motion to dismiss filed by Defendant, the Court concludes that

Defendant will not be prejudiced by the dismissal. Thus, the Court GRANTS

Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). As

such, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to dismiss as moot. The Clerk of Court

is directed to close the case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: November 1, 2016

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 2 - [15cv1919-GPC(KSC)]

Case 3:15-cv-01919-GPC-KSC Document 32 Filed 11/01/16 Page 2 of 2