Turner v. Modesto Police Department ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEPHEN TURNER, Case No. 1:23-cv-00210-ADA-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE AND ADJUST DOCKET 13 v. TO REFLECT VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 14 MODESTO POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., (ECF No. 10) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Stephen Turner is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this action. 18 Plaintiff filed this action on February 13, 2023. (ECF No. 1.) On May 10, 2023, the Court 19 issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause in writing as to why this action should not be 20 dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on Plaintiff’s claim of Nevada citizenship. (ECF No. 6.) 21 On June 2, 2023, and June 5, 2023, Plaintiff filed responses to Court’s order to show cause. 22 (ECF Nos. 7, 8.) On July 10, 2023, the Court discharged the order to show cause, and issued a 23 screening order finding Plaintiff’s complaint inadequately addressed diversity jurisdiction of all 24 the parties, finding Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a cognizable claim, and granting Plaintiff 25 leave to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 9.) On July 17, 2023, 26 Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. 27 (ECF No. 10.) “[U]nder Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), ‘a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his 1 | action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.’ ” 2 Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc., 193 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) 3 | (quoting Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997)). The Ninth Circuit has 4 | held that Rule 41(a) allows a plaintiff to dismiss without a court order any defendant who has yet 5 | to serve an answer or motion for summary judgment. Pedrina v. Chun, 987 F.2d 608, 609 (9th 6 | Cir. 1993). “[A] dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, 7 | the parties are left as though no action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and the 8 | district court lacks jurisdiction to do anything about it.” Commercial Space Mgmt. Co., Inc., 193 9 | F.3d at 1078. In this action, no defendant has filed an answer or other responsive pleading. 10 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to CLOSE the file in this 11 | case and adjust the docket to reflect voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule (a). 12 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 14 | Dated: _ July 19, 2023 Is UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28