Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01643/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01643-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Raul Marin Gonzalez
Plaintiff
Alvin R. Webber
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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RAUL MARIN GONZALEZ, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ALVIN R. WEBBER, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:15-cv-1643 MCE AC (PS) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and in forma pauperis. The proceeding was 

referred to this court by Local Rule 302(c)(21). 

I. BACKGROUND 

 Plaintiff’s original complaint was dismissed with leave to amend because the court was 

unable to determine what claim plaintiff was making, or why the case was filed in federal district 

court. See ECF No. 3. The complaint was extremely difficult to understand, did not contain a 

“short and plain” statement of the basis of this court’s jurisdiction, nor a “short and plain” 

statement of plaintiff’s claim showing that he is entitled to the $2,000,000 he sought as relief. 

Plaintiff then filed an amended complaint, styled “Motion To Amendment Complaint.” ECF 

No. 4. 

//// 

Case 2:15-cv-01643-MCE-AC Document 7 Filed 12/03/15 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

II. VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 

 Plaintiff has now filed a “Notice of Motion and Motion To Remand Removed Action.” 

ECF No. 5. However, this matter was not removed from state court, but rather was filed directly 

in federal district court. See ECF No. 1. Nevertheless, it appears from plaintiff’s most recent 

filing that he wishes to dismiss this action voluntarily, and to re-file it in state court. 

 At this stage of the proceedings, plaintiff is entitled to dismiss this action voluntarily, and 

to do so without leave of this court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. (“Rule”) 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The 

undersigned’s Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 6), filed the same day as plaintiff’s 

voluntary dismissal, has no effect on plaintiff’s ability to dismiss this action. The court will 

therefore construe plaintiff’s filing to be a proper dismissal of this action pursuant to 

Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), without prejudice. The court expresses no opinion on plaintiff’s apparent 

desire to re-file this action in state court. 

 Therefore, plaintiff having properly dismissed this action without prejudice (ECF No. 5), 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall close this case. 

DATED: December 3, 2015 

Case 2:15-cv-01643-MCE-AC Document 7 Filed 12/03/15 Page 2 of 2