Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00980/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00980-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 891
Nature of Suit: Agricultural Acts
Cause of Action: 07:499 Agricultural Commodities Act

---

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

EURO-PACIFIC FRUIT EXPORT, INC., )

a California Corporation, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

ALBERT L. GOOD dba CASTLE ROCK)

VINEYARDS, )

)

Defendant. )

____________________________________)

CIV F 07-980 AWI WMW

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY

DISMISSAL

On October 2, 2007, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of

this matter under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).

In Wilson v. City of San Jose, the Ninth Circuit explained:

Under Rule 41(a)(1), 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. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing

Hamilton v. Shearson-Lehman American Express, 813 F.2d 1532, 1534 (9th Cir.

1987)). A plaintiff may dismiss his action so long as the plaintiff files a notice of

dismissal prior to the defendant’s service of an answer or motion for summary

judgment. The dismissal is effective on filing and no court order is required. Id.

The plaintiff may dismiss some or all of the defendants, or some or all of his

claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice. Id.; Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609-

10 (9th Cir. 1993). The filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court

automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of

the notice. Concha, 62 F.2d at 1506. Unless otherwise stated, the dismissal is

ordinarily without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to commence another action for

the same cause against the same defendants. Id. (citing McKenzie v. DavenportHarris Funeral Home, 834 F.2d 930, 934-35 (9th Cir. 1987)). Such a dismissal

leaves the parties as though no action had been brought. Id.

Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997).

Case 1:07-cv-00980-AWI-LJO Document 15 Filed 10/03/07 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

No answers to Plaintiff’s complaint and no motions for summary judgment have been

filed in this case and it appears that no such answers or summary judgment motions have been

served. Because Plaintiff has exercised its right to voluntarily dismiss the complaint without

prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1), this case has terminated. See Wilson, 111 F.3d at 692.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is ordered to close this case in light

of Plaintiff’s Rule 41(a)(1) Notice of Dismissal. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 3, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00980-AWI-LJO Document 15 Filed 10/03/07 Page 2 of 2