Estate of Armando Osuna v. County of Stanislaus ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 | ESTATE OF ARMANDO OSUNA, et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-01240-DAD-SAB 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE AND REFLECT 13 v. VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO RULE 41(a) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF 14 | COUNTY STANISLAUS, et al., CIVIL PROCEDURE 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 37) 16 17 On December 13, 2019, the parties filed a stipulation dismissing this action with 18 | prejudice and with each party to bear their own costs and fees. (ECF No. 37.) In light of the 19 | stipulation of the parties, this action has been terminated, Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A) Gi); Wilson 20 | v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997), and has been dismissed with prejudice 21 | and without an award of costs or attorney’s fees. 22 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to CLOSE the file in this 23 | case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule (a). 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 FA. | Dated: December 16, 2019 ; UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28