(PC) Walker v. Kernan et al, No. 2:2017cv01764 - Document 73 (E.D. Cal. 2021)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 7/28/2021 RECOMMENDING 71 Rule 41 Motion for Voluntary Dismissal be granted and this action is dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 20 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Walker v. Kernan et al Doc. 73 Case 2:17-cv-01764-KJM-DB Document 73 Filed 07/28/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 G. DANIEL WALKER, 10 No. 2:17-cv-1764 KJM DB P Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SCOTT KERNAN, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 16 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendants conspired to retaliate against 17 him because he named them as defendants in lawsuits. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s 18 notice of voluntary dismissal. (ECF No. 71.) “Rule 41(a)(2) provides that after a defendant has filed an answer, a plaintiff may 19 20 voluntarily dismiss a claim only upon an order of the court.” U.S. ex rel Stone v. Rockwell 21 Intern. Corp., 282 F.3d 787, 810 (10th Cir. 2002) (citing Ohlander v. Larson, 114 F.3d 1531, 22 1536-37 (10th Cir. 1997)). The rule further provides that “[u]nless otherwise specified in the 23 order, a dismissal under this paragraph is without prejudice.” Fed. R .Civ. P. 41(a)(2). The court 24 should ordinarily grant a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), unless it will 25 prejudice a defendant. Ohlander, 114 F.3d at 1537. Defendants1 Green, Kumar, Martello, and 26 27 28 1 The undersigned recommended that the remaining defendants be dismissed on screening the second amended complaint. (ECF No. 28.) Those findings and recommendations remain pending before the district court. 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:17-cv-01764-KJM-DB Document 73 Filed 07/28/21 Page 2 of 2 1 Muniz have indicated that they do not oppose dismissal. (ECF No. 72.) Thus, the court will 2 recommend that this action be dismissed. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 4 1. 5 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge Plaintiff’s rule 41 motion for voluntary dismissal (ECF No. 71) be granted; 7 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after 8 being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with 9 the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to 10 Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed 11 and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure 12 to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's 13 order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 14 Dated: July 28, 2021 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 DLB:12 DB/DB Prisoner Inbox/Civil.Rights/R/walk1764.vol.dism 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
