Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-05694/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-05694-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HOWARD RYDOLPH,

Plaintiff,

 v.

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,

INC.; EQUIFAX, INC.; ALLY FINANCIAL,

INC.; MILITARY STAR; WELLS FARGO

BANK, N.A.; WEBBANK; and DOES 1

through 100 inclusive,

Defendants. /

No. C 16-05694 WHA

ORDER APPROVING

STIPULATION TO DISMISS

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,

WITH PREJUDICE

Plaintiff Howard Rydolph and defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., filed a stipulated

request pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) to dismiss Wells Fargo from this action with prejudice

(Dkt. No. 27). The stipulated request seeks a court order to that effect (ibid. at 2).

FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) permits the plaintiff to “dismiss an action without a court order by

filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared” (emphasis added). 

This provision is not a proper basis for plaintiff and Wells Fargo’s stipulated request. The

correct procedure here would have been for plaintiff to simply file a dismissal of Wells Fargo,

without seeking a court order, pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 

Nonetheless, as a concession to the shortness of life, the stipulation is APPROVED

without prejudice to other defendants impleading Wells Fargo. To be clear, this means the

phrase “with prejudice” in the approved stipulation refers only to plaintiff’s claims and not to

Case 3:16-cv-05694-WHA Document 28 Filed 12/14/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

any potential cross-claims (that might possibly be asserted later in the case) by Wells Fargo’s

co-defendants against Wells Fargo.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 14, 2016. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:16-cv-05694-WHA Document 28 Filed 12/14/16 Page 2 of 2