Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00505/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00505-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 47:553 Unauthorized Reception of Cable Service

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On December 3, 2015, Plaintiff J&J Sports Production, Inc. filed a request for dismissal of 

this case without prejudice. (Doc. No. 26.) Plaintiff’s notice is provided pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 41(a).

The Ninth Circuit has explained:

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).

J&J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff

v.

JESUS ARAMBULA d/b/a MARISCOS 

EL TAPATIO,

Defendants

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-00505-DAD-SKO

ORDER GRANTING VOLUNTARY 

DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

(Docs. 15, 25, 26)

Case 1:15-cv-00505-DAD-SKO Document 28 Filed 12/09/15 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

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 its right to voluntarily dismiss the complaint under Rule 41(a)(1), 

this case has been terminated. See Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692. Plaintiff’s Motion for Default 

Judgment (Doc. No. 15), filed on September 30, 2015, and the Findings and Recommendations 

(Doc. No. 25), issued on November 18, 2015, and are accordingly rendered moot.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is ordered to close this case in light 

of Plaintiff’s Rule 41(a) request for dismissal of this action without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 9, 2015 /s/ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00505-DAD-SKO Document 28 Filed 12/09/15 Page 2 of 2