Bracey v. City of New York
Bracey v. City of New York
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 11/4/ 2021 JAMAHL BRACEY, Plaintiffs, -against- 1:20-cv-06768-MKV CITY OF NEW YORK, POLICE OFFICER JONATHAN ORDER OF DISMISSAL RUIZ, SERGEANT THOMPSON, and ONE OTHER UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICER, Defendants. MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, United States District Judge: On August 30, 2021, the Court entered an Order directing Plaintiff to serve the summons and Complaint on Defendants on or before September 30, 2021, or to show cause why service has not been made. [ECF No. 31]. The Court warned that failure to comply with the Court’s Order would result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute. After Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order, on October 1, 2021, the Court entered a second order directing Plaintiff to serve the summons and Complaint on Defendants on or before November 1, 2021, or to show cause why service has not been made. [ECF No. 32]. The Court again warned that failure to comply with the Court’s Order would result in dismissal of the action for failure to
prosecute. To date, Plaintiff has not filed proof of service, shown cause why service has not been made, or taken any other action to prosecute the case. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned action is discontinued for failure to prosecute without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to this Court’s calendar if the application to restore the action is made by December 4, 2021. If no such application is made by that date, today’s dismissal of the action is with prejudice. See LeSane vy. Hall’s Sec. Analyst, Inc.,
239 F.3d 206, 209(2d Cir. 2001) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,
370 U.S. 626, 630(1962)). SO ORDERED. | i / . Date: November 4, 2021 MARY RAV i New York, NY United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown