From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vidales v. Brown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 29, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-01342-LJO-SAB-HC (E.D. Cal. Sep. 29, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 1:15-cv-01342-LJO-SAB-HC

09-29-2015

LUIS VIDALES, Petitioner, v. JERRY BROWN, Respondent.


ORDER VACATING SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE ACTION

Petitioner is a civil detainee proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging civil-commitment proceedings under the Sexually Violent Predator Act ("SVPA") which are ongoing in Merced County Superior Court. (ECF No. 1). On July 30, 2015, Petitioner filed the instant petition in the Northern District of California. (ECF No. 1). The matter was then transferred to this district. (ECF No. 10). On September 8, 2015, the Court issued a findings and recommendation that recommended that the petition be dismissed without prejudice because of abstention and exhaustion. (ECF No. 14). The Court also directed the Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge to this matter. (ECF No. 14). On September 24, 2015, Petitioner filed a notice of voluntary dismissal to withdraw the complaint and have the matter dismissed without prejudice. (ECF No. 16).

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, ". . . . the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing: (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared." Voluntary dismissal under this rule requires no action on the part of the court and divests the court of jurisdiction upon the filing of the notice of voluntary dismissal. See United States v. Real Property Located at 475 Martin Lane, Beverly Hills, CA, 545 F.3d 1134, 1145 (9th Cir. 2008) (describing consequences of voluntary dismissals pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) (A)).

In this case, Respondent has not yet filed an answer or other responsive pleading. The September 8, 2015 findings and recommendation is still pending before the assigned District Judge. Petitioner's notice of voluntary dismissal was effective upon filing and without a court order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). As Petitioner voluntarily dismissed his case, the undersigned vacates the September 8, 2015 finding and recommendation currently pending before the assigned District Judge. For the sake of clarity, in light of Petitioner's notice of voluntary dismissal, the undersigned directs the Clerk of Court to close the case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the September 8, 2015 findings and recommendation are vacated and the Clerk of the Court is directed to close the action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 29 , 2015

/s/_________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Vidales v. Brown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 29, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-01342-LJO-SAB-HC (E.D. Cal. Sep. 29, 2015)
Case details for

Vidales v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:LUIS VIDALES, Petitioner, v. JERRY BROWN, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 29, 2015

Citations

Case No. 1:15-cv-01342-LJO-SAB-HC (E.D. Cal. Sep. 29, 2015)