Gomez v. El Rey Supermercado ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ASHLEY GOMEZ, Case No. 1:23-cv-00203-JLT-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DISPOSITIONAL DOCUMENTS TO BE FILED 13 v. AND DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE FATHI HUSSEIN AS A 14 EL REY SUPERMERCADO, et al., DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 8) 16 17 18 19 On April 19, 2023, in response to the parties’ notice of settlement, the Court vacated all 20 pending matters and dates and ordered the parties to file dispositional documents no later than 21 May 9, 2023. (ECF Nos. 6, 7.) 22 On May 9, 2023, the parties filed a stipulated request for an extension of time to file 23 dispositional documents. (ECF No. 8.) In addition, Plaintiff submitted a notice of dismissal 24 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) with respect to the dismissal of Defendant Fathi 25 Hussein. (Id.) The dismissal of Defendant Hussein is with prejudice, with the parties to bear 26 their own attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs. (Id. at 3.) The claims against the other named 27 Defendants are not subject to Plaintiff’s notice of dismissal and will remain active until the final 28 dispositional documents are filed. The parties proffer the reason for the instant stipulation and 1 notice is that, while conferring over the dispositional documents, the parties identified a factual 2 dispute as to whether Defendant Hussein was confused with another individual and potentially 3 misnamed as a defendant in this matter. (Id. at 2.) As a result of this discovery, there have been 4 delays in obtaining all required signatures to the settlement agreement. (Id.) The parties 5 therefore request the Court extend the deadline to file dispositional documents under May 23, 6 2023. (Id. at 3.) 7 As to Plaintiff’s notice of dismissal, Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 allows a party to dismiss some or all of the defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. 9 Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 10 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the 11 defendants—or some or all of his claims—through a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”); Hells Canyon Pres. 12 Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (The Ninth Circuit has “only 13 extended the rule to allow the dismissal of all claims against one defendant, so that a defendant 14 may be dismissed from the entire action.”). “Filing a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court 15 automatically terminates the action as to the defendants who are the subjects of the notice.” 16 Concha, 62 F.3d at 1506. 17 As to the parties’ stipulated request for an extension of the dispositional documents filing 18 deadline, the Court shall grant the requested extension, up to May 23, 2023, to file dispositional 19 documents. However, the parties are advised that no further extensions of time shall be granted 20 absent a strong showing of good cause. Furthermore, the parties are remined that requests to 21 extend filing deadlines that are made on the eve of a deadline will be looked upon with disfavor 22 and may be denied absent a showing of good cause for the delay in seeking an extension. If such 23 a request is made after a deadline, the party seeking the nunc pro tunc extension must show 24 additional good cause as to why the matter was filed late. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. The parties SHALL FILE dispositional documents no later than May 23, 2023. 27 Failure to comply with the Court’s order may result in the imposition of sanctions, 28 including monetary sanctions against all parties and their attorneys of record and 1 dismissal of this action; and 2 2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate Defendant Fathi Hussein as a 3 defendant in this action. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 6 | Dated: _ May 9, 2023 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28