Escamilla v. State of California ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 BRANDON MIGUEL ESCAMILLA, Case No. 1:24-cv-00364-KES-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO TERMINATE STATE OF 12 v. CALIFORNIA AND CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., REHABILITATION AS PARTIES IN THIS ACTION 14 Defendants. (ECF No. 12) 15 16 On June 10, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal of Defendants State of California 17 and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation without prejudice and without an 18 award of fees or costs pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 11.) 19 Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to dismiss some or all of the 20 defendants in an action through a Rule 41(a) notice. Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 21 692 (9th Cir. 1997); see also Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The 22 plaintiff may dismiss either some or all of the defendants—or some or all of his claims—through 23 a Rule 41(a)(1) notice.”). 24 Defendants State of California and California Department of Corrections and 25 Rehabilitation have not filed answers or motions for summary judgment in this action. Under 26 Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) a “plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a notice 27 of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 1 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate State of California and 2 | California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation as defendants in this action. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee 5 |Dated: _ June 11, 2024 ‘ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28