Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00856/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00856-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 8:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing

---

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

JASSEM TORABI, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of )

 Homeland Security, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

CIV- F-06-0856 AWI SMS

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

(Document #14)

Plaintiff has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action. Plaintiff filed his motion

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). Because Defendants had filed an answer,

the court inquired whether Defendants were willing to stipulate to dismiss this action. On

February 26, 2007, Defendants filed a response and state that they stipulate to the dismissal of

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

Case 1:06-cv-00856-AWI -SMS Document 18 Filed 02/28/07 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

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

1986). Because a stipulation for dismissal has been filed and signed by all parties who have

made an appearance, as required by Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), this action has terminated. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED and Clerk of

the Court is DIRECTED to close this file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 28, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00856-AWI -SMS Document 18 Filed 02/28/07 Page 2 of 2