Matthews v. Reckitt Benckiser LLC ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS MATTHEWS, individually and 11 on behalf of all others similarly situated, | Case No. 1:20-cv-00854-JLT-EPG 12 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY 13 DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE Vv. 14 (ECF No. 58) RECKIT BENCKISER LLC, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 7 On April 29, 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice voluntarily dismissing this action without 18 prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)@). (ECF No. 58.) Therefore, 19 this action has been terminated. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)G); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 20 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Valanzuela v. Mauser USA, LLC, 2021 WL 916412, at 21 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2021) (dismissing class action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A) where class 22 33 had not been certified and dismissal was without prejudice). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the case. 24 ll TT Is SO ORDERED. 25 || Dated: _ May 2, 2022 [spe Fey UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28