Rahimian v. Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion to voluntarily dismiss the action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The court granted the motion and dismissed the case with prejudice, ordering each side to bear its own fees and costs.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the Joint Motion to Dismiss and dismissing the action with prejudice“Having considered the parties’ request, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion. (ECF No. 14.) Thus, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the instant action, with each side bearing its own fees and costs.” | agree with court The court correctly applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which allows for voluntary dismissal by stipulation signed by all parties. The parties explicitly requested dismissal with prejudice, and the court granted that specific request. The procedural requirement of filing a joint motion under local rules was satisfied. The decision follows directly from the rule and the parties' stipulation. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and cites the appropriate federal rules and supporting case law. It accurately notes that while no court order is strictly required for a Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) dismissal to be effective, the local rules of the Southern District of California require such stipulations to be filed as joint motions. The court properly granted the motion as requested by the parties.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PAYMAN RAHIMIAN, Case No. 23-cv-0628-BAS-DDL 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 14)
14 MITSUBISHI MOTORS NORTH
AMERICA, INC., 15 Defendant. 16 18 Before this Court is the parties’ request to dismiss with prejudice this action. (Joint 19 Mot., ECF No. 14.) Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A), a plaintiff has an 20 absolute right to voluntarily dismiss its action by (1) filing a notice of voluntary dismissal 21 before a defendant has filed an answer or moved for summary judgment, see id. 22 41(a)(1)(A)(i), or (2) filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have 23 appeared, see id. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). See also Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 24 (9th Cir. 1997). Dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is effective upon the filing of a 25 compliant notice or stipulation. No court order is required. See Stone v. Woodford, CIV- 26 F-05-845 AWI-DLB, 2007 WL 527766 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2007). A dismissal is without 27 prejudice unless the parties stipulate otherwise. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). 28 I Nonetheless, the local civil rules of this district require that where, as here, litigants 2 ||seek voluntary dismissal by filing a signed stipulation pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ai), 3 a stipulation must be filed as a joint motion.! 4 Having considered the parties’ request, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion. (ECF 5 || No. 14.) Thus, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the instant action, with each 6 || side bearing its own fees and costs. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. / , 8 || DATED: August 21, 2023 Lin A (Ayphan 6 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 || ——_—— 28 ' See Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, United States District Court for the Southern District of California.