Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01477/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01477-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee 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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ANDREA CRAWFORD,

Plaintiff,

v.

GRAHAM HOLDINGS COMPANY LONG 

TERM DISABILITY PLAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01477-BLF 

ORDER RE NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

[Re: ECF 40]

Plaintiff has filed what purports to be a Notice of Dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ECF 40. The Notice does not include a stipulation and is 

signed solely by Plaintiff’s counsel. Id.

A plaintiff may dismiss an action by filing a notice of dismissal “before the opposing party 

serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(i).

Defendants in this case filed an answer on May 29, 2015. ECF 19. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s notice 

is improper. 

Alternatively, the plaintiff may dismiss a case by filing “a stipulation of dismissal signed 

by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(ii). If the parties wish to dismiss the 

case, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to file a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties.

Furthermore, the Court notes that the caption in Plaintiff’s Notice of Dismissal names the incorrect 

defendants. To be valid, any future stipulation of dismissal must name the correct defendants. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 13, 2015 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-01477-BLF Document 41 Filed 11/13/15 Page 1 of 1