Yes, but this is a different Fidia atra!
There was a homonymy between Fidia atra Motschulsky, 1861 (previously Lypesthes ater, now Fidia atra again!) and Fidia atra Jacoby, 1882.
The taxon swap above is for the Asian species (Fidia atra Motschulsky). I already changed the C. American species Fidia atra Jacoby into Neofidia spuria!

Actually, I didn't explicitly propose the taxon swap above! I just "synonymised" Lypesthes with Fidia, following Kumari et al. 2020 (https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/view/957), so I suppose the above change happened automatically?
The correct name for the species should be Fidia atra (gender agreement), not Fidia ater! I already changed that in another taxon swap, so the valid name should now be shown as Fidia atra!

The whole "mess" with Fidia/Neofidia/Lypesthes has been around for a while. Strother was revising the "New World genus" Fidia and came across the problem that this genus name was originally proposed for an East Palaearctic species, which had been placed in Lypesthes since 1863, even though Fidia is an older name than Lypesthes! The name Fidia has then been mis-applied for what is now Neofidia (New World genus). In 2006, Strother and some co-authors submitted an application to the ICZN to preserve the previous usage of Fidia and Lypesthes, which had been stable for about 140 years! It would have really made sense to accept that application, but ICZN said no (https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-66/issue-2/bzn.v66i2.a12/Opinion-2227-Case-3375Fidia-Baly-1863-and-Lypesthes-Baly-1863/10.21805/bzn.v66i2.a12.short). Fidia and Lypesthes were then left "in limbo" without a clear solution, until 2020 Kumari et al. (with Strother as co-author) did the changes required by the nomenclatural rules and proposed a new genus name (Neofidia) for the New World ones.
The primary homonymy between Fidia atra Motschulsky, 1861 (Japan) and Fidia atra Jacoby, 1882 (Guatemala) had been around for over a century! But as Fidia atra Jacoby turned out to be a junior synonym of F. spuria anyway, there was no need to propose a new name.
So, now we have:
Fidia atra Motschulsky (Japan)
= Lypesthes ater (old combination)
= Fidia ater (current combination, but incorrect gender agreement)
and
Neofidia spuria (Lefèvre) (Central America)
= Fidia spuria Lefèvre (old combination)
= Fidia atra Jacoby (junior subjective synonym and junior primary homonym)
It would be less confusing if iNaturalist showed author names for those species. But I guess it was a conscious decision not to show those, as that would probably go against the whole idea of keeping it simple and beginner-friendly!