Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00156/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00156-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONALD BUCKNER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

E.I. du PONT de nemours, et al.,, )

)

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

CIV- F-05-0156 AWI SMS

ORDER CLOSING CASE IN

LIGHT OF STIPULATION OF

DISMISSAL WITH

PREJUDICE

On July 18, 2006, Plaintiff and Defendant VF Imagewear, Inc., dba Bulwark Protective

Apparel filed a stipulation for dismissal of the claims against Defendant VF Imagewear Inc. with

prejudice. All other Defendants have previously been dismissed from this action. The notice of

dismissal was signed by all parties who remain in this action.

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

an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) by filing a

notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer or

of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first occurs, or (ii) by filing a

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action.

Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is

without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication

upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court of

the United States or of any state an action based on or including the same claim.

Rule 41(a)(1)(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. 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 Cir.

Case 1:05-cv-00156-AWI -SMS Document 124 Filed 07/21/06 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

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)(ii); Eitel, 782 F.2d at 1473 n.4. 

Because a stipulation for dismissal of the claims against VF Imagewear, Inc. with

prejudice has been filed and signed by all parties who remain in this action, as required by Rule

41(a)(1)(ii), the case against VF Imagewear, Inc. has terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro.

41(a)(1)(ii); In re Wolf, 842 F.2d at 466; Gardiner, 747 F.2d at 1189.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant VF Imagewear, Inc. is DISMISSED from this action in light of the filed and

properly signed Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) stipulation of dismissal with prejudice; and

2. All Defendants having been dismissed from this action, the Clerk of the Court is

DIRECTED to dismiss this action and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 19, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00156-AWI -SMS Document 124 Filed 07/21/06 Page 2 of 2