(PC) Camposeco v. Garcia ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAMUEL CAMPOSECO, Case No. 1:21-cv-01190-AWI-BAK (SKO) (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE 13 v. COURT TO CLOSE CASE 14 ANDY GARCIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Samuel Camposeco is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 18 in this civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint has not been screened or 19 served. No defendant has filed an answer or motion for summary judgment, nor has any 20 attorney appeared on behalf of a defendant. 21 Plaintiff has filed a pleading captioned as “Motion to Dismiss Suit Based on Stipulations 22 by Both Parties.” (ECF No. 8.) The Court construes this pleading as a voluntary dismissal 23 under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under this rule, “. . . the plaintiff may 24 dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing 25 party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of 26 dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). 27 The pleading is not a stipulation nor is a stipulation attached to it. The pleading is 28 signed only by Plaintiff. Instead, Plaintiff states that he and defendants’ counsel “have 1 | conferred in good faith, discussed potential resolutions of the matter and have agreed to 2 || progressively discuss ‘ancillary services’ that may be afforded to the petitioner. ... (ECF No. 8 3 | Even though Plaintiff and counsel for prospective defendants have reached an agreement 4 | on “progressive discussions,” the settlement negotiations off the record do not constitute a 5 | stipulation or settlement agreement. 6 Plaintiff moves for dismissal of this action, and the Court construes the motion as a 7 | request for dismissal with prejudice. Plaintiff states: 8 Hence, as a gesture of good faith, Mr. Camposeco hereby relinquishes this matter and submits for a dismissal of this cause. .. . Mr. Camposeco understands the 9 consequences of this dismissal. Mr. Camposeco also acknowledges that if his “progressive discussions” do not render a resolution, this matter will remain 10 dismissed. 11 | dd.) A motion to dismiss is unnecessary, however. Upon the filing of a notice of voluntary 12 | dismissal under 41(a)(1)(A)(Q), no order of the court is necessary to effectuate dismissal. Comm. 13 | Space Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1078 (9th Cir. 1999). In this case, no defendant 14 | has filed an answer or other responsive pleading, and Plaintiff's filing of the notice of voluntary 15 | dismissal with prejudice resolves Plaintiff's claims. 16 Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 | Dated: _ September 13, 2022 ZS Lb t ut "SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28