Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00848/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00848-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting 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

Van E. Flury, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Desert Schools; First USA Bank, NA, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-848-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Plaintiff Van Flury filed this action on April 22, 2009. Defendant Chase bank

answered on July 2, 2009 (Doc. #8), and filed a Cross Motion for Summary Judgment on

August 7, 2009 (Doc. #15). Plaintiff never filed a response to Defendant’s Cross Motion for

Summary Judgment. Instead, he filed “Plaintiff’s Notice of the Dismissal of the Action

(Doc. #20),” pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A). Defendant filed a

response to Plaintiff’s voluntary motion to dismiss, pointing out that he could no longer

dismiss under Rule 41(a)(1).

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) provides, in relevant part: “[P]laintiff 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 . . . .” Because Defendant had both

answered and filed a motion for summary judgment at the time Plaintiff filed his motion to

dismiss, unilateral dismissal without a Court order under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) was no longer

available. The Court therefore will deny Plaintiff’s Notice of Dismissal.

Case 2:09-cv-00848-JAT Document 25 Filed 12/18/09 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 -

The Court suspects Plaintiff thought that by filing the motion for voluntary dismissal,

he did not need to respond to Defendant’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. If that is

the case, then Plaintiff was incorrect. Plaintiff needs to get a response on file or the Court

will dismiss this action for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff has had Defendant’s Cross Motion

since August, so the Court will give him a very limited time to file his response. 

Plaintiff shall file a response to the Cross Motion for Summary Judgment by January

11, 2010. If Plaintiff does not file a response by that date, the Clerk shall dismiss this action

without further notice for lack of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

41(b). Defendant shall file a reply in support of its cross motion, if any, by January 29, 1010.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED Denying Plaintiff’s Notice of the Dismissal of the Action (Doc.

#20). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff does not file a response to Defendant’s

Cross Motion for Summary Judgment by January 11, 2010, the Clerk shall dismiss this action

without further notice pursuant to Rule 41(b).

DATED this 18th day of December, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-00848-JAT Document 25 Filed 12/18/09 Page 2 of 2