Case 2:24-cv-08093-FLA-E Document 52 Filed 07/07/25 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:694 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LILLIAN JURDI, Case No. 2:24-cv-08093-FLA (Ex) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING ORDER 13 v. DISMISSING ACTION [DKT. 50] AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S 14 MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT NIKE, INC., et al., [DKT. 20] 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Case 2:24-cv-08093-FLA-E Document 52 Filed 07/07/25 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:695 1 On June 16, 2025, Plaintiff Lillian Jurdi (“Plaintiff”) filed a Notice of 2 Dismissal, dismissing the action in its entirety without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. 3 Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Dkt. 49. On June 17, 2025, the court issued an Order 4 Dismissing Action, Dkt. 50, in error as no order of dismissal was required as 5 Defendant Nike, Inc. (“Defendant”) had neither filed an answer nor a motion for 6 summary judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 7 Accordingly, the court VACATES the Order Dismissing Action, Dkt. 50, 8 consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). All dates and deadlines governing this 9 action are VACATED. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. 20, is DENIED as moot. 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 13 Dated: July 7, 2025 _______________________________ FERNANDO L. AENLLE-ROCHA 14 United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2