Escobedo v. Sharma ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT g EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ? || JOSE ESCOBEDO, 10 Case No. 1:24-cv-00419-EPG Plaintiff, 1 ORDER RE: NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY Vv. DISMISSAL 12 RAJEEV SHARMA, et al., (ECF No. 10) 13 Defendants. 14 15 On May 13, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice voluntarily dismissing this action pursuant to 16 || Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).! (ECF No. 10). Therefore, this action has been 17 |) terminated. Fed. R. Civ. P. A4l(a)(1)(A)G); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th 18 Cir, 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all pending 19 |! deadlines and then to close the case. 20 91 || IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 . . Dated: _ May 14, 2024 □□□ heey 24 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 ' The notice does not state whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Federal Procedure 41(a)(1)(B), “[u]nless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is 2g || 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.”