(PC) Chatman v. Vera ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 AUDREE CHATMAN, Case No. 1:18-cv-01463-SAB (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 12 v. TO TERMINATE ACTION PURSUANT TO PARTIES’ STIPULATION 13 H. VERA, (ECF No. 104) 14 Defendant. 15 16 Plaintiff Audree Chatman is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 17 action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 On October 6, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation to dismiss this action with prejudice 19 pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as the case has been 20 resolved in its entirety. (ECF No. 104.) 21 Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides in pertinent part that, “the plaintiff may dismiss an action 22 without a court order by filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have 23 appeared. A voluntary stipulation to dismiss an action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) 24 automatically terminates the action without operation of a court order.” Black Rock City, LLC v. 25 Pershing Cty. Bd. of Comm’rs, 637 F. App’x 488 (9th Cir. 2016) (citing Commercial Space 26 Mgmt. Co. v. Boeing Co., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999)). Here, Plaintiff and counsel for 27 Defendants have signed and dated a stipulation to dismiss this action, and filed it with the Court. 1 In light of parties’ stipulation for voluntary dismissal, this action is terminated by 2 | operation of law without further order from the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Each party 3 | is to bear its own litigation costs and attorney’s fees. The Clerk of the Court is directed to 4 | terminate all pending motions and deadlines and close this action. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le 7 | Dated: _October 6, 2022 _ OO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28