UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SIMON CHIKHLADZE, Plaintiff, 25-CV-7144 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL TEA TSULUKIANI, ET AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: On October 7, 2025, the Court received Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal, in which he indicates that he withdraws this action with prejudice. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow a plaintiff voluntarily to dismiss an action without a court order by filing (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A).1 Defendants have not been served or appeared, and Plaintiff does not need the Court’s permission to dismiss this action. CONCLUSION Accordingly, based on Plaintiff’s notice (ECF 24), this action is voluntarily dismissed under Rule 41(a). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate any pending applications and close this case.

1 A voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a) is generally without prejudice. “But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). Before bringing this action, Plaintiff appears already to have voluntarily dismissed with prejudice actions against the same defendants arising from the same facts. See Chikhladze v. FBI, No. 6:25-CV-1038, 9 (D. Kan. Mar. 6, 2025); Chikhladze v. Frederiksen, No. 25-CV-2590, 12 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 25, 2025). The Court, however, need not reach the issue. The Court certifies, under

(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States,

(1962). SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 9, 2025 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge