Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04625/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04625-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Stockholders Suits

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: ROCKET FUEL INC.

DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

Case No. 15-cv-04625-PJH 

ORDER DENYING PROPOSED 

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

Re: Dkt. No. 77

On August 26, 2016, this court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the 

complaint in this shareholder derivative action for failure to comply with the particularized 

pleading requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1. Dkt. 75. The order 

provided plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint, which was due on September 21. 

Id. at 14.

On September 21, instead of filing an amended complaint per the court’s order, 

plaintiffs filed a request to voluntarily dismiss the action without prejudice. See Dkt. 77 

(“Notice and [Proposed] Order Regarding Voluntary Dismissal”). As this is a derivative 

shareholder action, voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is inappropriate. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 23.1(c) (requiring court approval for voluntary dismissal). Moreover, nominal 

defendant Rocket Fuel opposes the plaintiffs’ request unless dismissal is with prejudice. 

Dkt. 78. The court therefore DENIES plaintiffs’ request to voluntarily dismiss the action 

without prejudice.

The court further ORDERS the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint by October 

5. If the plaintiffs do not comply with the court’s order by that date, their inaction will 

Case 4:15-cv-04625-PJH Document 79 Filed 09/28/16 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

constitute grounds for a dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

41(b). Alternatively, if the plaintiffs do not intend to amend their complaint, they may 

stipulate to a dismissal of this action with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 28, 2016

__________________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:15-cv-04625-PJH Document 79 Filed 09/28/16 Page 2 of 2