UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RICARDO VELASQUEZ, Plaintiff, 25 Civ. 01646 (JHR) -v.- ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNION DELI AND GROCERY NY CORP. and 805 EAST 163RD ST. CORP., Defendants.

JENNIFER H. REARDEN, District Judge:

Plaintiff Ricardo Velasquez brought this action for violations of, inter alia, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law against Union Deli and Grocery NY Corp. and 805 East 163rd St. Corp. on February 26, 2025. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff served the summons and Complaint on Defendants on April 16, 2025. See ECF Nos. 9 and 10. Defendants’ responses to the Complaint therefore were due on May 7, 2025. See id; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A) (“A defendant must serve an answer . . . within 21 days after being served with the summons and complaint.”). Defendants have not responded to the Complaint or otherwise appeared. On June 25, 2025, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause directing Plaintiff, “by July 9, 2025, [to] show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.” ECF No. 11 at 1 (emphasis in original). The Court cautioned Plaintiff that “[f]ailure to submit a timely and proper motion for default judgment [could] result in dismissal without prejudice of this case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.” Id. (emphasis in original). Plaintiff did not respond to the Order to Show Cause. On August 13, 2025, the Court issued a second Order to Show Cause directing Plaintiff, “by no later than August 20, 2025, [to] show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.” ECF No. 12. The Court warned Plaintiff that “[a]ny failure by Plaintiff to make this showing w[ould] result in a dismissal of the case as to Defendants without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).” /d. (citing Velasquez v. Saturnia, Inc., No. 21 Civ. 9151 (ALC) (S.D.N-Y. Apr. 11, 2022)) (emphasis in original). On August 31, 2025, upon Plaintiff's application, the Court extended the deadline for Plaintiff to seek a default judgment to October 8, 2025. ECF No. 14. The Court again cautioned Plaintiff that, “[i]f Defendants fail[ed] to respond to the Complaint by October 6, 2025, and Plaintiff fail[ed] to move for a default judgment by October 8, 2025, then this case w[would] be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).” □□□ (emphasis in original). Defendants did not respond to the Complaint by October 6, 2025 or thereafter. Plaintiff has not requested a certificate of default, filed a motion for a default judgment, or taken any other action. Accordingly, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the Court’s inherent power, see Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

(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 31, 2025 New York, New York oh ENNIFER H. REARDEN United States District Judge