Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-00532/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-00532-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

1

Case No. 16-CV-00532-LHK 

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

GARY MINOR,

Plaintiff,

v.

FEDEX OFFICE & PRINT SERVICES, 

INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-CV-00532-LHK 

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION 

FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR 

RECONSIDERATION 

Re: Dkt. No. 74

On April 25, 2016, the Court dismissed with prejudice Plaintiff Gary Minor’s (“Plaintiff”) 

claims against Defendants FedEx Office & Print Services and Federal Express Corporation. ECF 

No. 72. The Court also dismissed with leave to amend Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants 

Lance Freitas (“Freitas”) and Gallagher Basset Services, Inc. Id. On May 4, 2016, Freitas filed a 

motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration asking the Court to dismiss with prejudice 

Plaintiff’s claims against Freitas. ECF No. 74. 

On May 10, 2016, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). A plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss under Rule 41(a) until 

service by an adverse party of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

41; Heun v. Gibbs, 909 F.2d 1488 (9th Cir. 1990). A pending motion to dismiss is not the 

Case 5:16-cv-00532-LHK Document 77 Filed 05/10/16 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 16-CV-00532-LHK 

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

Northern District of California

equivalent of a motion for summary judgment for purposes of Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). See Miller v. 

Reddin, 422 F.2d 1264, 1266 (9th Cir.1970). Additionally, voluntary dismissal by a plaintiff 

under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) automatically terminates the action; no order of the court is required. 

Miller v. Reddin, 422 F.2d 1264, 1266 (9th Cir. 1970). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s case has been 

voluntarily dismissed and Freitas’s motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration is 

DENIED as moot. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 10, 2016

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:16-cv-00532-LHK Document 77 Filed 05/10/16 Page 2 of 2