(PC) Knapp v. Madera County Department of Corrections ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ARTHUR DEAN KNAPP, Case No.: 1:18-cv-00811-LJO-SKO 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO 13 v. DISMISS CASE 14 MADERA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF (Doc. 57) CORRECTIONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On December 20, 2019, Defendants filed a notice of settlement in this action. (Doc. 55.) 19 The Court ordered the parties to file dispositional documents by February 7, 2020. (Doc. 56.) 20 On January 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss this action with prejudice, 21 pursuant to the parties’ settlement. (Doc. 57.) Since the request for dismissal is made by 22 Plaintiff’s motion, and not by stipulation signed by both parties, this case may be dismissed only 23 upon court order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). 24 Accordingly, the Court recommends that this action be dismissed with prejudice. These 25 findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to 26 this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of the date of 27 service of these findings and recommendations, the parties may file written objections with the 28 Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 1 Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of 2 rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 3 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Sheila K. Oberto Dated: January 23, 2020 /s/ . 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28