District Judge Margaret R. Guzman: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. finding as moot [] Motion to Dismiss; granting 120 Motion to Dismiss On September 2, 2026, Plaintiff moved to dismiss part of Counts III and VI without prejudice. [ECF No. 109]. Defendants opposed. [ECF No. 110]. On September 11, 2026, the Courts chambers emailed the parties, directing Plaintiff to choose, by September 13, between (1) amending her motion to seek dismissal with prejudice, or (2) proceeding to trial on those counts as pled. On September 14, 2026, Plaintiff filed an amended motion seeking dismissal with prejudice. [ECF No. 120].
Plaintiff's motions cite Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), which permits a plaintiff to 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. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Defendants have already answered: UMass Memorial Health Care and UMass Memorial Medical Center answered in May 2024 [ECF No. 31], and May and Randolph answered in April 2025 [ECF No. 43]. Accordingly, Plaintiff may seek dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), which permits dismissal by court order, on terms the Court considers proper. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2).
The Court therefore treats ECF No. 120 as a motion under Rule 41(a)(2) and GRANTS it. Accordingly:
- Count III is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, to the extent it is based on Plaintiffs complaints about Defendants delayed reimbursement to the federal government.
- Count VI is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, to the extent it is based on Plaintiffs complaints about Defendants delayed reimbursement to the federal government.
- Count IV was withdrawn on the record at the August 24, 2026 status conference, upon inquiry by the Court. [ECF No. 100 (unofficial transcript on file with the Court)]. That withdrawal was not limited to any specific factual theory and covers Count IV in its entirety. The Court therefore treats Count IV as DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
ECF No. 109 is DENIED AS MOOT.
(SF)