1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 kad 6 LAUSTEVEION JOHNSON, Case No. 2:21-cv-02076-RFB-VCF 7 Plaintiff, ORDER CONFIRMING VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 8 Vv. 9 COVID-19, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 In screening pro se plaintiff Lausteveion Johnson’s civil-rights complaint, this Court 13 || dismissed the claims without prejudice and with leave to amend by September 12, 2022. 14 || (ECF No. 10). A month later, Johnson filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss this action. 15 || (ECF No. 12). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i) provides that a plaintiff may 16 || dismiss an action without a court order by filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposing 17 || party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment[.]’ The Ninth Circuit has 18 || instructed “it is beyond debate that a dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, 19 || no court order is required, the parties are left as though no action had been brought, the 20 || defendant can’t complain, and the district court lacks jurisdiction to do anything about it.” 21 || Com. Space Mgmt. Co. Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1999). 22 No responsive pleading or summary-judgment motion has been filed in this case, 23 || so Johnson’s voluntary dismissal was effective under Rule 41(a)(1) upon its filing. 24 It is therefore ordered that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 9) 25 || is denied as moot. 26 The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 27 || DATED: October 6, 2022 C < 28 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE