1

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 LAUSTEVEION JOHNSON, Case No. 3:22-cv-00090-ART-CSD 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

7 LAURIE HOOVER, et al.,

8 Defendants.

9 Pro se Plaintiff Lausteveion Johnson filed an application to proceed in forma 10 pauperis and submitted a civil-rights complaint under

. (ECF 11 Nos. 1, 1-1). On July 7, 2022, the Court screened the complaint, permitting one 12 claim to proceed and dismissing the remaining claim with leave to amend. (ECF 13 No. 6 at 9-10). Plaintiff chose not to amend his complaint. The Court 14 subsequently granted Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, 15 excluded the case from the Inmate Early Mediation Program, and indicated that 16 this action would “proceed on the normal litigation track.” (ECF Nos. 8, 9, 10). 17 Following acceptance of service, the sole remaining defendant, Jennifer Nash, 18 moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it is “maliciously duplicative” 19 of a complaint in a previously filed case. (ECF No. 14). 20 Instead of responding to the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff filed a notice of 21 voluntary dismissal of this action. (ECF No. 16). Under Federal Rule of Civil 22 Procedure 41(a)(1), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by 23 filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or 24 a motion for summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). “[A] dismissal 25 under Rule 41(a)(1) is effective on filing, no court order is required, the parties 26 are left as though no action had been brought, the defendant can’t complain, and 27 the district court lacks jurisdiction to do anything about it.” Commercial Space 28 1 || Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Boeing Co., Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1999). Moreover, 2 || “[e]ven if the defendant has filed a motion to dismiss, the plaintiff may terminate 3 || his action voluntarily by filing a notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1).” Concha 4 || v. London,

(9th Cir. 1995); see also Kun Yuan Asset Mgmt. 5 || Co. Ltd. v. Su, No. 21-cv-06236-BLF,

, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 6 || 2022) (“While Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss, this does not constitute 7 || an ‘answer or a motion for summary judgment’ under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i).”). Thus, 8 || because no answer or motion for summary judgment has been filed, the Court 9 || dismisses this action without prejudice. 10 It is therefore ordered that this action is dismissed in its entirety without 11 || prejudice. 12 It is further ordered that Defendant Jennifer Nash’s motion to dismiss (ECF 13 || No. 14) is denied as moot. 14 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court will close this case. 15 16 DATED THIS 16t day of November 2022. 17 18 19 i idan a1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28