Swartz v. 44 Lexington Associates, LLC

District Court, S.D. New York

Swartz v. 44 Lexington Associates, LLC

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK HELEN SWARTZ, Plaintiff, 23 Civ. 07601 (JHR) -v.- ORDER OF DISMISSAL 44 LEXINGTON ASSOCIATES, LLC, Defendant. JENNIFER H. REARDEN, District Judge: On August 28, 2023, Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this action, ECF No. 1, which Plaintiff amended on September 7, 2023, ECF No. 6. On September 19, 2023, Defendant was served with process. See ECF No. 9. Defendant’s response was due on October 10, 2023. See id.; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) (“A defendant must serve an answer . . . within 21 days after being served with the summons and complaint.”). Defendant has not responded to the Complaint or otherwise appeared. On October 12, 2023, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, directing Plaintiff to show why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. ECF No. 10. The Court’s October 12 Order informed Plaintiff that cause may be shown by requesting a certificate of default from the Clerk of Court, and, by October 20, 2023, filing a motion for default judgment. Id. at 1. The Court cautioned that “[f]ailure to submit a timely and proper motion for default judgment may result in dismissal without prejudice of this case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.” Id. Since that Order was issued, Plaintiff has not requested a certificate of default, filed a motion for default judgment, or otherwise taken any action to make progress in this case. Accordingly, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the Court’s inherent power, see Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

370 U.S. 626, 630-32

(1962), the Court hereby dismisses this case, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: October 23, 2023 New York, New York Xu JENNIFER H. REARDEN nited States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown