Tafoya v. City of Hanford ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER TAFOYA, Case No. 1:20-cv-01707-NONE-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET 13 v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 14 CITY OF HANFORD, (ECF No. 3) 15 Defendant. 16 17 Christopher Tafoya (“Plaintiff”) is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 23, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint in this action.1 However, 19 Plaintiff did not file an application to proceed in forma pauperis nor did he pay the filing fee. On 20 December 8, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to either pay the filing fee or file an application 21 demonstrating that he is entitled to proceed in this action without prepayment of the filing fee. 22 (ECF No. 2.) On December 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to 23 Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 3.) 24 “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 25 action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’ ” 26 Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) 27 1 The Court takes judicial notice that Plaintiff has previously filed an action based on the allegations in the complaint that was voluntarily dismissed after screening. See Tafoya v. City of Hanford, No. 1:20-cv-00010-DAD-SAB (E.D. 1 | (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). The Ninth Circuit has 2 | held that Rule 41(a) allows a plaintiff to dismiss without a court order any defendant who has yet 3 | to serve an answer or motion for summary judgment. Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609 (9th 4 | Cir. 1993). “[A] dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, 5 | the parties are left as though no action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the 6 | district court lacks jurisdiction to do anything about it.” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc., 193 7 | F.3d at 1078. In this action, no defendant has filed an answer or other responsive pleading. 8 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to assign a district judge to 9 | this case for the purpose of closing the case and then to adjust the docket to reflect voluntary 10 | dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a). 11 Db IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le 13 | Dated: _December 22, 2020 _ Oe 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28