Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00476/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00476-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 625
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property
Cause of Action: 21:881 Forfeiture Property-Drugs

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4697 )

LINGARD ROAD, MERCED, )

MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, )

APN: 066-130-005, INCLUDING ALL )

APPURTENANCES AND )

IMPROVEMENTS THERETO, )

)

)

Defendant. )

____________________________________)

CIV- F-05-476 AWI SMS

ORDER CLOSING CASE IN

LIGHT OF RULE 41(a)(1)

STIPULATION FOR

DISMISSAL

On August 17, 2007, the parties filed a stipulation for dismissal of this action. The notice

indicates that it is made pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1).

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

an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) by filing a

notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer or

of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first occurs, or (ii) by filing a

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action.

Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is

without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication

upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court of

the United States or of any state an action based on or including the same claim.

Dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1) are effective upon filing and no court order is required. See

Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 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); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1986); Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co.,

Case 1:05-cv-00476-AWI -SMS Document 31 Filed 08/28/07 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

747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984). Because the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal

that complies with Rule 41(a)(1), this case has terminated. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk close this case in light of parties’s 

filed Rule 41(a)(1) Stipulation For Dismissal. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 27, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00476-AWI -SMS Document 31 Filed 08/28/07 Page 2 of 2