IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

RONALD J. ROBINSON, No. 82122 Appellant, , REVA WALDO, FILED Respondent.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is an appeal from a judgment in an action to recover money. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Timothy C. Williams, IP' Judge.

Because preliminary review of the docketing statement and the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) indicated a jurisdictional defect, this court directed appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. Specifically, although the district court granted certification of the order appealed from as final pursuant to NRCP 54(b), the certification is improper because the district court did not make an express determination that there is no just reason for delay. Aldabe v. Evans, 83 Nev. 135, 425 P.2d 598 (1967). ln response, appellant proposes that despite the ineffective certification, the order may be construed as final for purposes of appeal because it resolves the last claims against appellant and all other parties had been previously dismissed. However, as appellant concedes, and as respondent confirms in response, the court orally dismissed Frank Yoder and Alisa Davis; no written order has been entered dismissing Yoder or Davis. I3efore the entry of a final written judgment, a decision by the district

2,1-6601 court is not appealable. See NRAP 4(a)(1); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev. 686, 747 P.2d 1380 (1987). Therefore, the order appealed from does not finally resolve all claims against all the parties to the action and is ineffective for the purpose of appeal. See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000) (defining a final judgment). This court lacks jurisdiction and ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.'

Cadish

A uf J.

Pickering

cc: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Law Offices of Michael F. Bohn, Ltd. The Law Offices of David Liebrader, APC Eighth District Court Clerk

'Appellant may appeal from a final written order resolving all claims against all parties, or from a proper certification pursuant to NRCP 54(b).

Pursuant to appellant's March 2, 2021, "Motion to Withdraw Motion Incorrectly Filed in This Case," this court takes no action in regard to appellant's motion to stay briefing filed on February 3, 2021. The clerk shall strike the motion to stay briefing.