Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01569/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01569-6/pdf.json

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

---

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 January 5, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). See Doc. No. 45. The notice is signed by 

all remaining parties who have appeared in this case.

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

(A) . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a 

notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion 

for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who 

have appeared. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the 

dismissal is without prejudice. 

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) thus allows the parties to dismiss an action voluntarily, after service of an 

answer, by filing a written stipulation to dismiss signed by all of the parties who have appeared, 

although an oral stipulation in open court will also suffice. See Carter v. Beverly Hills Sav. & 

Loan Asso., 884 F.2d 1186, 1191 (9th Cir. 1989); Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th 

LUIS ROBERTO MARTINEZ ,

Plaintiff

v.

KINGS COUNTY, et al.,

Defendants

CASE NO. 1:10-CV-1569 AWI DLB (PC) 

ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE AND DENYING REQUEST 

TO TAKE DEPOSITION AS MOOT

(Doc. Nos. 44, 45)

Case 1:10-cv-01569-AWI-DLB Document 46 Filed 02/23/15 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

Cir. 1986). Once the stipulation between the parties who have appeared is properly filed or made 

in open court, no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 

41(a)(1)(A); Eitel, 782 F.2d at 1473 n.4. “Caselaw concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule 

41(a) (1) (ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and 

does not require judicial approval.” In re Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989); Gardiner v. 

A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984); see also Gambale v. Deutsche Bank AG, 

377 F.3d 133, 139 (2d Cir. 2004); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 

1077 (9th Cir. 1999). 

As the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice under Rule 

41(a)(1) that is signed by all remaining parties who have made an appearance, this case has 

terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d at 466; Gardiner, 747 F.2d 

at 1189; see also Gambale, 377 F.3d at 139; Commercial Space Mgmt, 193 F.3d at 1077.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall CLOSE this case in light of the

filed and properly signed Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) Stipulation Of Dismissal With Prejudice and 

Defendant’s request to take plaintiff’s deposition (Doc. No. 44) is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-01569-AWI-DLB Document 46 Filed 02/23/15 Page 2 of 2