(PC) Steward v. Pfeiffer ( 2020 )

nen ene nee ee nnn en I RE OI OSE ED 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 DONNY STEWARD, 7 Case No. 1:19-cv-01022-DAD-EPG (PC) 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY 9 || DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER, et al., (ECF No. 40) 1 Defendants. 12 13 On December 17, 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)G@). (ECF No. 40). Therefore, this action has been terminated.! Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 || 41(aC (ANG); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the 17 || Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all pending motions and deadlines and to 18 || close the case. 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. *I || Dated: _December 18, 2020 [Je hey — 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 ' As Plaintiff seeks dismissal without prejudice, the Court notes that the dismissal is without prejudice, 26 || 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 27 || otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice. But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.”). 28 || Thus, although Plaintiff's case is voluntarily dismissed, it is unclear, and the Court does not decide, whether the voluntary dismissal is with or without prejudice.