Can a party qualify as a 'prevailing party' under a federal fee shifting statute when an adverse party voluntarily dismisses its claims under Rule 41(a)(1) even though the dismissal is self-executing and entered without a court order?

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) is a federal fee shifting statute that permits a defendant to obtain attorneys’ fees where, inter alia, the defendant is a prevailing party, Christiansburg Garment Co. v. E.E.O.C., 434 U.S. 412, 422 (1978). To qualify as a prevailing party, a party must obtain a court ruling that marks a “judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties.” Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, 500 Inc. v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., 532 U.S. 598, 601 (2001). The Tenth. Eleventh, and Federal Circuits have concluded that a voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) (1) does not constitute a “judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties.” The Fourth Circuit here affirmed a district court ruling that held a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) granted the defendants prevailing party status and awarded fees and costs. The question presented is this: Can a party qualify as a “prevailing party” under a federal fee shifting statute when an adverse party voluntarily dismisses its claims under Rule 41(a)(1) even though the dismissal is self-executing and entered without a court order?