Seever v. City of Modesto ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 DAVID ROBERT SEEVER, et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-01373-JLT-EPG 10 Plaintiffs, ORDER RE: NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF ll] v. DEFENDANT GALEN CARROLL 12 CITY OF MODESTO, et al., (ECF No. 21) 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 On January 14, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of 17 Pefendant Galen Carroll. (ECF No. 21). This Defendant has not filed either an answer or a 1g motion for summary judgment.' Accordingly, in light of the notice, the case against Defendant 19 (Galen Carroll has ended and is dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)@); 20 ilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is 21 fespectfully directed to designate on the docket that Galen Carroll has been terminated as a 99 flefendant in this case. IS SO ORDERED. 23 24| Dated: _ January 18, 2022 [sf Fey UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 | While Defendant Galen Carroll previously filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8), a plaintiff may erminate an action voluntarily by filing a notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) even if a defendant has 28 filed a motion to dismiss. Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995).