Jones
v.
State

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
United States District Court, W.D. OklahomaApr 1, 2008
Case No. CIV-06-1157-C. (W.D. Okla. Apr. 1, 2008)

Case No. CIV-06-1157-C.

April 1, 2008


ORDER


This action was dismissed without prejudice, and the Petitioner filed a new habeas petition in this proceeding. Judge Bacharach recommended dismissal without prejudice of the new petition. The Petitioner did not object, and the Court adopts Judge Bacharach's recommendation.

When the action was dismissed, the action was terminated. As a result, the Court lacks the authority to proceed further in this action. Accordingly, as Judge Bacharach recommended, the Court dismisses the newly filed petition, without prejudice, based on the absence of jurisdiction.

See United States v. California, 507 U.S. 746, 756 (1993) ("A dismissal without prejudice terminates the action and `concludes the rights of the parties in that particular action.'" (citation omitted)); Pell v. Azar Nut Co., 711 F.2d 949, 950 (10th Cir. 1983) (stating that a dismissal without prejudice terminated the action).

See United States v. Wallace Tiernan Co., 336 U.S. 793, 794 n. 1 (1949) (stating that a dismissal without prejudice "ended this suit so far as the District Court was concerned" (citations omitted)); see also Walker v. University of Colorado Board of Regents, No. 98-1240, 1998 WL 703171 at *2 (10th Cir. Oct. 9, 1998) (unpublished op.) (holding that motions were moot because they had been filed in an action previously dismissed without prejudice).

IT IS SO ORDERED