Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00438/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00438-5/pdf.json

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

---

Ralph S. Greer

Attorney at Law

2493 East Colorado Boulevard

Pasadena, 91107

(626) 405 2353

California Bar Number: 87075

Attorney for Plaintiff Robert Travis

United States District Court

Eastern District of California

ROBERT TRAVIS

Plaintiff

 vs.

JAMES A. YATES, JEANNE S.

WOODFORD, and Does 1 to 20 inclusive

Defendants

Case No. 1:06-CV-00438-AWI-DLB

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

ORDER

Judge Anthony W. Ishii

Comes now plaintiff Robert Travis by and through his attorney of record Ralph S. Greer and

respectfully requests the court to dismiss the above referenced case without prejudice as to all

parties and all causes of action.

Respectfully submitted

_________________________

Ralph S. Greer

Attorney for Plaintiff Robert Travis

ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a request to dismiss this action. In Wilson v. City of San Jose, the

Ninth Circuit explained the ramifications of a Plaintiff’s request to dismiss pursuant to Rule 41

(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:

Case 1:06-cv-00438-AWI-DLB Document 43 Filed 04/19/07 Page 1 of 2
-2- Ralph S. Greer

Document No. 07.04.0121 Request for dismissal

Under Rule 41(a)(1), 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. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing

Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman American Express, 813 F.2d 1532, 1534 (9th

Cir. 1987)). A plaintiff may dismiss his action so long as the plaintiff files a

notice of dismissal prior to the defendant’s service of an answer or motion for

summary judgment. The dismissal is effective on filing and no court order is

required. Id. The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some

or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice. Id.; Pedrina v. Chun, 987

F.2d 608, 609-10 (9th Cir. 1993). The filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal

with the court automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are

the subjects of the notice. Concha, 62 F.2d at 1506. Unless otherwise stated,

the dismissal is ordinarily without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to commence

another action for the same cause against the same defendants. Id. (citing

McKenzie v. Davenport-Harris Funeral Home, 834 F.2d 930, 934-35 (9th Cir.

1987)). Such a dismissal leaves the parties as though no action had been

brought. Id.

Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).

No answers to Plaintiff’s complaint and no motions for summary judgment have been

filed in this case and it appears that no such answers or summary judgment motions have been

served. Because Plaintiff has exercised his right to voluntarily dismiss this complaint under

Rule 41(a)(1), this case has terminated as explained.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is ordered to close

this case in light of Plaintiff’s Rule 41(a)(1) Voluntary Dismissal. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00438-AWI-DLB Document 43 Filed 04/19/07 Page 2 of 2