Gilbert v. Modesto 2241 Petroleum Inc. ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DARREN GILBERT, Case No. 1: 22-cv-00150-DAD-SAB 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE BALJIT BHATTI 13 v. AS A PARTY IN THIS ACTION 14 MODESTO 2241 PETROLEUM, INC., et al., (ECF No. 4) 15 Defendants. 16 17 On March 9, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendant Baljit Bhatti pursuant 18 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). On the same date, Plaintiff also filed a first amended 19 complaint that omits this Defendant. Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a 20 party to dismiss some or all of the defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. 21 City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 22 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some 23 or all of his claims—through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”)); but see Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. 24 U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (The Ninth Circuit has “only extended the 25 rule to allow the dismissal of all claims against one defendant, so that a defendant may be 26 dismissed from the entire action.”). “Filing a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court 27 automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice.” Concha, 62 F.3d at 1506. 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Defendant Baljit Bhatti 2 | as a defendant in this action. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 5 | Dated: _ March 10, 2022 ‘ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28