BMO Harris Bank N.A. v. Singh ( 2022 )

nee nen nen nnn nen en en en nen nn ne I Ee 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 BMO HARRIS BANK N.A., 7 Case No. 1:21-cv-00124-JLT-EPG 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY 9 Vv. DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 NIRMAL SINGH, (ECE No. 20) 1 Defendant. 12 13 On February 16, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice voluntarily dismissing this action without 14 prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)G). (ECF No. 10.) Therefore, 15 this action has been terminated. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)G); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 16 || F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close 17 || the case.! 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 || Dated: _ February 17, 2022 [Je heey 1 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 ' On August 11, 2021, Defendant Nirmal Singh filed a notice that this case was automatically stayed by the 25 || commencement of bankruptcy proceedings. (ECF No. 16.) Although “[t]he general rule is that actions taken in violation of an automatic stay are void,” In re Sambo’s Restaurants, Inc., 754 F.2d 811, 816 (9th Cir. 1985) 26 || (citation omitted), dismissal here does not constitute a “continuation” of a judicial proceeding against the debtor in violation of the automatic stay. See 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1); O’Donnell v. Vencor Inc., 566 F.3d 1104, 1108-11 (th 97 || Cir. 2006). Specifically, the dismissal does not harm the debtor, and is “consistent with the purpose of [section 362(a)]” because it does not intrude on the debtor’s “breathing space” or threaten other creditors by giving 28 || preference to Plaintiff. O’Donnell, 566 F.3d at 1110 (quoting Indep. Union of Flight Attendants v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., 966 F.3d 457, 459 (9th Cir. 1992)). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28