(PC) Kidwell v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 SEQUOYAH DESERTHAWK Case No. 1:22-cv-00253-JLT-EPG (PC) KIDWELL, also known as Jason Scott 11 Harper, 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE IN LIGHT OF PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF (ECF NO. 19) CORRECTIONS AND 15 REHABILITATIONS, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 On July 8, 2022, Plaintiff Sequoyah Deserthawk Kidwell filed a notice of voluntary 19 dismissal (ECF No. 19), pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), as 20 Defendants have not filed an answer or motion for summary judgment. In light of Plaintiff’s 21 notice of voluntary dismissal, this case has ended.1 22 \\\ 23 \\\ 24 25 1 The Court notes that Plaintiff states that he is dismissing this case because this Court is corrupt and is helping to coverup the crimes of Defendants. Plaintiff offers no evidence or developed argument in 26 support of these assertions; rather, his dissatisfaction with the Court appears based on the findings and recommendations that this case be dismissed without leave to amend. (See ECF No. 18). Regardless, the 27 reason for the dismissal is ultimately immaterial, as “a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss his action prior to service by the defendant of an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Wilson v. 28 City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). enn ne een en nn nn ne on nn en nn NO I I EI 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the case.” 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4} Dated: _ July 11, 2022 hey □□ 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ ? Rule 41(a)(1)(b) provides as follows: “Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is 26 | without prejudice. But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.” The Court notes 27 || that the findings and recommendations in this case recommended dismissal, in part, based on duplicative claims being contained in 1:22-cv-290-JLT-SAB, which case has since been dismissed due to □□□□□□□□□□□ 28 | notice of voluntary dismissal. (ECF No. 18, p. 11); (1:22-cv-290-JLT-SAB (ECF No. 19)).