Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_19-cv-08287/USCOURTS-azd-3_19-cv-08287-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights 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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Joseph Farnsworth, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

City of Flagstaff, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-19-08287-PCT-JAT

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is the parties’ Stipulation and Joint Motion to Dismiss 

Certain Claims and the Individual Defendants with Prejudice and to Remand to the 

Coconino County Superior Court (Doc. 35). As the Motion’s title indicates, the Motion 

seeks dismissal of all claims against several defendants and seeks dismissal of only certain 

claims against the other defendants. (Doc. 35). The Court now rules on the Motion 

(Doc. 35).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) governs voluntary dismissals by a plaintiff. 

Specifically, “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a 

stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Rule 41(a)(1)’s plain text thus allows only for voluntary dismissal of an 

action, not an individual claim. See Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest 

Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005).

Nevertheless, the Ninth Circuit has construed Rule 41(a)(1) to allow a party to 

dismiss all claims against a defendant—in a case with more than one defendant—when all 

Case 3:19-cv-08287-JAT Document 36 Filed 04/03/20 Page 1 of 3
- 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

parties that have appeared have stipulated to such a dismissal. See Hells Canyon 

Preservation Council, 403 F.3d at 687; Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609–10 & n.1 (9th 

Cir. 1993); see also Lee v. Am. Airlines, No. 07-0541 SC, 2007 WL 2212907, at *1 (N.D. 

Cal. July 31, 2007). Here, the parties have agreed to dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, 

against the following defendants: (1) Larry Phoenix, (2) Luke Apfel, and (3) Colby Walton.

(Doc. 35 at 2). The Court will therefore dismiss these defendants from the case with 

prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) based on the parties’ stipulation (Doc. 35).

However, Rule 41(a)(1) does not allow a plaintiff to dismiss individual claims. Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A) (providing that “[t]he plaintiff may dismiss an action” under certain 

circumstances (emphasis added)); Hells Canyon Preservation Council, 403 F.3d at 687.

As such, a withdrawal of an individual claim must instead be done under Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 15. Hells Canyon Preservation Council, 403 F.3d at 687–88; Gen. Signal 

Corp. v. MCI Telecomms. Corp., 66 F.3d 1500, 1513 (9th Cir. 1995) (“[W]e have held that 

Rule 15, not Rule 41, governs the situation when a party dismisses some, but not all, of its 

claims.” (citations omitted)).

The Court therefore construes the Motion’s (Doc. 35) request to dismiss counts 3 

and 4 of the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 31) as a stipulation to amend the First 

Amended Complaint (Doc. 31) under Rule 15(a)(2). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). However, 

no amended complaint has been filed. Plaintiffs must file an amended complaint by Friday, 

April 10, 2020. Assuming Plaintiffs properly do so, the Court will remand thereafter. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Stipulation and Joint Motion to Dismiss Certain 

Claims and the Individual Defendants with Prejudice and to Remand to the Coconino 

County Superior Court (Doc. 35) is GRANTED IN PART.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

41(a)(1)(A)(ii), that the claims against Defendants Larry Phoenix, Luke Apfel, and Colby 

Walton are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE according to the parties’ stipulation (Doc. 

35 at 2). The Clerk of Court shall terminate these defendants from the case.

Case 3:19-cv-08287-JAT Document 36 Filed 04/03/20 Page 2 of 3
- 3 -

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs may amend the First Amended

Complaint (Doc. 31) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) by Friday, April 

10, 2020.

Dated this 3rd day of April, 2020.

Case 3:19-cv-08287-JAT Document 36 Filed 04/03/20 Page 3 of 3