Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01921/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01921-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:416 Denial of Social Security Benefits

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANNETTE CRUZ, 

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-01921-SKO

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 

TO CLOSE THIS CASE

On August 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed the parties’ stipulation that the action be dismissed with 

prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 

In relevant part, Rule 41(a)(1)(A) provides as follows:

[A] plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a notice of 

dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for 

summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have 

appeared.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A). Rule 41 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. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 

F.2d 1470, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 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. Caselaw concerning 

stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of 

Case 1:15-cv-01921-SKO Document 13 Filed 08/05/16 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

dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval. Commercial Space 

Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999). “The plaintiff may dismiss some 

or all of the defendants, or some or all of his claims, through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice,” and the 

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

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

Because the parties have filed a stipulation for dismissal of this case with prejudice under 

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) that is signed by all parties who have made an appearance (Doc. 12), this case 

has terminated. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 

Accordingly IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 4, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01921-SKO Document 13 Filed 08/05/16 Page 2 of 2