Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00580/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00580-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Monique Curiel
Plaintiff
Fresno Credit Bureau
Defendant
Law Office of John D. Suhr
Defendant

Document Text:

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

On September 10, 2015, the parties filed a motion to dismiss this action with prejudice. 

See Doc. No. 16. The Court views this motion as a stipulation for dismissal of this case with 

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

Rule 41(a)(1), in relevant part, reads:

(A) . . . the 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. . . . (B) Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the 

dismissal is without prejudice. 

Dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), when properly filed, are effective immediately and do not 

require a court order/court approval. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1); Yesh Music v. Lakewood 

Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013); Commercial Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d

MONIQUE CURIEL,

Plaintiff,

v.

FRESNO CREDIT BUREAU, and THE 

LAW OFFICE OF JOHN D. SUHR,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-580 AWI GSA 

ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIGHT OF 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH

PREJUDICE 

(Doc. No. 16)

Case 1:15-cv-00580-AWI-GSA Document 18 Filed 09/10/15 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

1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); In re 

Wolf, 842 F.2d 464, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1989). 

Here, all parties who have appeared in this case signed the stipulated dismissal. Because 

all parties have signed the stipulated dismissal with prejudice, this case has terminated 

automatically. See id. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case in light of the parties’ properly filed and signed Rule 

41(a)(1)(A)(ii) Stipulation Of Dismissal With Prejudice; and

2. The September 10, 2015 motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 16) is DENIED as unnecessary in 

light of the automatic nature of a Rule 41(a)(1) stipulated dismissal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 10, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00580-AWI-GSA Document 18 Filed 09/10/15 Page 2 of 2