In an earlier post, I talked about some of the deficiencies in a complaint that can prevent a party from taking advantage of the statute of limitations extension in Rule 41(a). In short, if a party voluntarily dismisses without prejudice a claim for which the underlying statute of limitations has expired, and—as it turns out—the complaint was never timely served or was not properly “commenced,” the refiled action is subject to dismissal with prejudice. Last week, the Court of Appeals expanded on this point, holding that Rule 41(a)’s savings provision does not extend the statute of limitations on a claim that failed to satisfy Rule 8(a)(1)’s notice pleading rule.