From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ekpe v. The City of New York

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 9, 2021
20 Civ. 9143 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 9, 2021)

Opinion

20 Civ. 9143 (AT)

06-09-2021

JIMMEY EKPE, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE AGING, CARYN RESNICK, SAL RULLAN, KAMLESH PATEL, JACK RIZZO, JOHN DOE(S) and JANE DOE(S) names currently unknown each in his/her official and individual capacities, Defendants.


ORDER

ANALISA TORRES, District Judge:

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff s letters dated May 28, June 4, and June 8, 2021. ECF Nos. 33-35. With respect to Plaintiffs request for clarification, the Court finds that clarification is unnecessary: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 is clear that a party may amend its pleading as a matter of course within 21 days after service a motion under Rule 12(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B).

By June 16, 2021, Plaintiff shall respond to the pending motion to dismiss. By July 2, 2021. Defendants shall file their reply, if any. By this same date. Plaintiff shall file a letter requesting leave to move to join additional parties. Additionally, Plaintiff is reminded that at the initial pretrial conference held on May 10, 2021, the Court directed Plaintiff to file any motion for consolation within two weeks. Plaintiff has failed to do so.

The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 34 and 35.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ekpe v. The City of New York

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 9, 2021
20 Civ. 9143 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 9, 2021)
Case details for

Ekpe v. The City of New York

Case Details

Full title:JIMMEY EKPE, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jun 9, 2021

Citations

20 Civ. 9143 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 9, 2021)