Wright v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion to dismiss the action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The court granted the motion and ordered the case dismissed with prejudice.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Grant of Joint Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice“Having considered the parties’ request, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 27.) Thus, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE instant action.” | agree with court The court correctly applied Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), which allows voluntary dismissal by stipulation signed by all parties. The parties explicitly stipulated to dismissal with prejudice for the plaintiff's claims, overriding the default rule of dismissal without prejudice. The court's reliance on local rules requiring a joint motion for such stipulations is consistent with the S.D. Cal. Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the applicable rule (Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)), cites binding Ninth Circuit authority confirming the right to dismiss by stipulation, acknowledges the local rule requirement for a joint motion, and honors the parties' specific stipulation regarding prejudice. The reasoning is concise and directly addresses the motion.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOAN WRIGHT, Case No. 22-cv-1954-BAS-BLM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ 13 v. JOINT MOTION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE (ECF No. 27) 14 ULTA SALON, COSMETICS & FRAGRANCE, INC., 15 Defendant. 16 17 Before this Court is Parties’ request to dismiss this action with prejudice pursuant to 18 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 41. (ECF No. 27.) Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), a 19 plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss her action by (1) filing a notice of 20 voluntary dismissal before a defendant has filed an answer or moved for summary 21 judgment, or (2) filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. 22 See also Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Dismissal pursuant 23 to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is effective upon the filing of a compliant notice or stipulation. No 24 court order is required. See Stone v. Woodford, CIV-F-05-845 AWI-DLB, 2007 WL 25 527766 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2007). Nonetheless, the local civil rules of this district require 26 27 28 | || that where, as here, litigants seek voluntary dismissal by filing a signed stipulation pursuant 2 ||to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), such a stipulation must be filed as a joint motion.! 3 A dismissal is without prejudice unless the parties stipulate otherwise. See Fed. R. 4 ||Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). Here, the parties have stipulated otherwise by moving jointly for 5 || dismissal of Plaintiff Joan Wright’s claims with prejudice and the putative class’s claims 6 || without prejudice. (Mot., ECF No. 27 at 2:2-4.) 7 Having considered the parties’ request, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion to 8 Dismiss. (ECF No. 27.) Thus, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE □□□□□□□□□□□ 9 instant action. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 A , 12 || DATED: January 16, 2024 (Yin A (Lyphan 13 United States District Judge 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. ~_9.