Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00933/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00933-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK S. ENSIGN,

Petitioner,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGAR,

Respondent.

 /

CV F 06-00933 OWW SMS HC

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

CLOSE FILE PURSUANT TO PETITIONER’S

REQUEST TO VOLUNTARILY DISMISS

ACTION

[Doc. 11]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus on May 26, 2002. By order

 of August 23, 2006, the Court directed Petitioner to show cause as to why the petition should not

be dismissed for failure to name a proper respondent and for failure to exhaust the state court

remedies. On September 12, 2006, Petitioner filed a response to the order to show and requests

that the Court voluntarily dismiss the action as he has failed to exhaust the state court remedies.

“[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(i), ‘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.’”

Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999)

(quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). “[A] dismissal under

Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties are left as though no

action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to

Case 1:06-cv-00933-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 09/18/06 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

do anything about it.” Id. at 1078. Respondent has not filed an answer or other responsive

pleading.

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to close the file in this case

and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). (Doc.

11.)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 15, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00933-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 09/18/06 Page 2 of 2