Cota v. Porven, Ltd. ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JULISSA COTA, Case No. 20-cv-1806-BAS-RBB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION TO DISMISS 14 PORVEN, LTD., et al., [ECF No. 19] 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff commenced this action against Defendants on September 14, 2020, alleging 18 website accessibility violations under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 19 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. (“ADA”), and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (“Unruh Act”) 20 on September 14, 2020. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) By this action, Plaintiff sought to represent 21 not only herself, but two putative classes: a nationwide class in connection with her ADA 22 claim and a California-only class in connection with both her ADA claim and her Unruh 23 Act claim. (Id. ¶¶ 43–44.) However, Plaintiff never moved for class certification. 24 Before this Court is the parties’ joint motion to dismiss this action under Rule 25 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). (Joint Mot., ECF No. 19.) Specifically, the Joint Motion seeks (1) 26 dismissal with prejudice of Plaintiff’s individual claims and (2) dismissal without prejudice 27 of the putative class claims. In support of their Joint Motion, the parties filed a stipulation 28 of dismissal, signed by all parties who have appeared. (See id.) 1 Under Rule 41(a)(1), a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntarily dismiss its action 2 by (1) filing a notice of voluntary dismissal before a defendant has filed an answer or 3 moved for summary judgment, or (2) filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties 4 who have appeared. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A); see also Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 5 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). Dismissal is effective upon the filing of a compliant notice 6 or stipulation, as described in Rule 41(a)(1)(A), and no court order is required. Stone v. 7 Woodford, No. CIV-F-05-845 AWI-DLB, 2007 WL 527766 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2007). A 8 dismissal is without prejudice unless the parties stipulate otherwise. Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 41(a)(1)(B). Crucially, “prior to certification” a named plaintiff may dismiss claims on 10 behalf of a putative class under Rule 41(a)(1)( because “Rule 23(e) does not provide the 11 district court with nay supervisory authority over such dismissals, nor does it require notice 12 to the absent class members.” Ripley v. Bridgestone Retail Ops., LLC, No. C09-1482 RSM, 13 2010 WL 11684294, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 2, 2010) (citing Moore’s Federal Practice 14 3d, § 23.64[2][a] (2007)); see also Richey v. GetWellNetwork, Inc., No. 20-cv-2205-BEN- 15 BLM, 2021 WL 424281, at *3 (“Because no class has been certified in this case, Rule 23 16 does not mandate either Court approval of the instant settlement or notice to putative class 17 members” (quoting Allred v. Chicago Title Co., No. 19CV2129-LAB (AHG), 2020 WL 18 5847550, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2020)). 19 Nonetheless, the local civil rules of this district require that where, as here, litigants 20 seek voluntary dismissal by filing a signed stipulation pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), such a 21 stipulation must be filed as a joint motion.1 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 See Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, United States District Court 1 Having considered the parties’ request, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion. (ECF 2 ||No. 19.) Thus, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiff's claims and 3 || DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the putative class’s claims against all 4 Defendants. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees. The Clerk of Court is directed 5 close the case. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 A , 8 || DATED: January 18, 2022 Lin A (Ayphan 6 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28