KB Components Plastunion AB v. Husqvarna Forestry Products N.A., Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION KB COMPONENTS PLASTUNION AB PLAINTIFF v. Civil No. 4:21-cv-4039 HUSQVARNA FORESTRY PRODUCTS, N.A., INC.; and HUSQVARNA OUTDOOR PRODUCTS, N.A., INC. DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 18). The Court finds that no response is necessary, and the matter is ripe for consideration. Plaintiff asks this Court to approve the dismissal of this case with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) on the grounds that the parties have reached an agreement to settle all of Plaintiff’s claims. Once a defendant has filed an answer, “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). However, Defendants have not filed an answer in this case, and thus a court order is not necessary to dismiss the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) (“plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment”). A notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) is self-executing and requires no action or approval from the court. See Safeguard Bus. Sys., Inc. v. Hoeffel, 907 F.2d 861, 863-64 (8th Cir. 1990). Under certain circumstances, courts may construe a motion for voluntary dismissal as a self-executing notice, despite being styled as a motion. See Ventura-Vera v. Dewitt, 417 Fed. App’x 591, 591-92 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (liberally construing plaintiff’s “motion to dismiss” as a notice based on his clear indication that he “inten[ded] to dismiss [certain] claims in his complaint”). Here, Plaintiff clearly indicates that it intends for its case to be dismissed with prejudice. For the above-stated reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 18) is self-executing and requires no action or approval from the Court. However, to the extent that Court action is necessary to dismiss this case with prejudice, the Court issues this order. Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 18) is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 18th day of October, 2021. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge