Halpin v. Mobile Life Support Services, Inc.
Halpin v. Mobile Life Support Services, Inc.
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SS SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK USEC SONY DOCUMENT SEAN HALPERIN, ELECTRONICALLY AOC #: Plainti pare riteo 20/23] #3 -against- ———— □
MOBILE LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES, INC. and 7:16-CV-9725 (NSR) WILLIAM JEFFRIES, ORDER Defendants. NELSON S. ROMAN, United States District Judge Plaintiff Sean Halperin commenced this action against Defendants on or about December 16, 2016, asserting claims under, inter alia, the American with Disabilities Act,
42 U.S.C. § 12117. (ECF No. 1.) By Order to Show Cause (“OSC”), dated March 10, 2020, the Court directed Plaintiff to show cause on or before March 24, 2020, why the action should not be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) (“Rule 41(b)”). To date, Plaintiff has not responded. A review of the docket reveals Plaintiff has taken little action to prosecute his claims since the action was commenced in December 2016. Moreover, despite the passage of more than six months, Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Court’s OSC. When determining whether to dismiss an action pursuant to Rule 41(b), courts have considered whether: (1) plaintiff's failure to prosecute caused a delay of significant duration; (2) plaintiff was given notice that further delay would result in dismissal; (3) defendant was likely to be prejudiced by further delay; (4) the need to alleviate court calendar congestion was carefully balanced against plaintiff's right to an opportunity for a day in court; and (5) the trial court adequately assessed the efficacy of lesser sanctions. U.S. ex rel. Drake v. Norden Sys., Inc.,
375 F.3d 248, 254(2d Cir. 2004) (internal citations omitted). No one factor is determinative. Jd. (citing Peart v. City of New York,
992 F.2d 458, 461(2d Cir. 1993)). Having considered the relevant factors, the Court determines that dismissal of the action is warranted. Plaintiff's delays have been significant in duration and Plaintiff has failed to communicate with the Court since December 2016 (more than three years ago). Accordingly, it is hereby a 1 _
The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the action and serve a copy of this Order upon the Plaintiff at his last known residence, and to show proof of service on the docket.
Dated: October 23, 2020 SO ORDERED: White Plains, New York
________________________________ NELSON S. ROMÁN United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown