(PC) Juan M.Montenegro v. Sullivan ( 2020 )

1.40 UV UOLVFAALY LE NY bMVVULIICIIl Lo VoiVveiacyv Payee +ViIs+ 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 | JUAN M. MONTENEGRO, Case No. 1:20-cv-00847-NONE-EPG (PC) 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE 9 v. AND CLOSE THE CASE 10 | WARDEN J. SULLIVAN, (ECF No. 12) 1] Defendant. 12 13 On August 31, 2020, Plaintiff filed what the Court construes as a notice voluntarily 14 | dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 | 41(a)\(1)(A)@). (ECF No. 12). Therefore, this action has been terminated.! Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 | 41(a)(1)(A)Q); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the 17 | Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to terminate all pending motions and deadlines, assign a district 18 | judge to this case for the purpose of closing the case, and then to close the case. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 | Dated: _ September 2, 2020 [sf ey — 2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 ' As Plaintiff seeks dismissal without prejudice, the Court notes that the dismissal is automatically without 26 prejudice, unless Plaintiff has previously dismissed a federal or state court action that is based on, or includes, the same claims at issue in the present case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B) (“Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice. But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court 27 action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.”). Thus, although Plaintiff’s case is voluntarily dismissed, it is unclear, and the Court does not decide, whether the voluntary 28 dismissal is with or without prejudice.