From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Rose M. Singer Center

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 5, 2008
Case No. 07 Civ. 3988 (RJS) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 5, 2008)

Opinion

Case No. 07 Civ. 3988 (RJS).

August 5, 2008


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


The pro se complaint in the above-entitled action was filed on May 22, 2007. Plaintiff filed the U.S. Marshal's Process Receipt and Return of Service form with the Clerk of the Court on August 16, 2007, unexecuted as to defendant Officer C.O. Straker. This case was reassigned to this Court's docket on September 4, 2007. On September 20, 2007, the Court received a letter from Jessica T. Cohen, Esq., on behalf of both defendants, advising the Court that they would not answer the Complaint because they believed that they had not properly been served.

On October 12, 2007, the Court issued an order directing Plaintiff to contact the Pro Se Office of this Court for assistance in prosecuting this case. To date, an affidavit of service of the summons and complaint has not been filed with the Clerk of the Court. Plaintiff's time to serve the complaint without further leave of the Court has expired.

On March 5, 2008, the Plaintiff was Ordered to Show Cause by appearing on March 24, 2008, to explain why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff was advised that failure to appear or otherwise notify this Court, may result in the dismissal of this action. As of March 24, 2008, Plaintiff had not communicated with the Court, nor did she appear as she was ordered. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above and stated on the record on March 24, 2008, the Court ordered that this complaint be dismissed without prejudice.

However, after the March 24 conference, but before issuance of a written order dismissing the case, the Court received a letter dated March 13, 2008, addressed to the Pro Se Office, from Plaintiff, indicating that Plaintiff's address had changed and asserting that Plaintiff "would not like this case to be dismissed." Plaintiff concluded by asking the Pro Se Office, "1 would like to know what I have to do next."

In light of this letter, which was postmarked March 17, 2008, the Court vacated the March 24, 2008 order dismissing this action. By order of the court dated April 29, 2008, Plaintiff was directed to submit a letter to the Court, with copies to opposing counsel, setting forth the reasons for Plaintiff's failure to serve the complaint and otherwise to prosecute this matter. The letter was due to the Court no later than May 10, 2008.

On May 23, 2008, the Court received a letter from Jessica T. Cohen, Esq., counsel for Defendants, urging the Court to dismiss the action because Plaintiff had failed to properly serve defendants or to prosecute this action.

On June 10, 2008, the Court received a letter from Plaintiff, postmarked June 5, 2008. In that letter, Plaintiff stated that she would not like her case dismissed. Plaintiff failed to explain the reasons for her failure to serve the complaint, to submit the letter on time in response to the Court's order, and otherwise to prosecute the action. Accordingly, despite the fact that Plaintiff had failed to comply with the Court's orders on two separate occasions, the Court granted Plaintiff one final opportunity to continue to prosecute this case. The Court therefore ordered that service be made within thirty days — no later than July 10, 2008. Plaintiff was warned that if Plaintiff fails to comply with this deadline, the case would be dismissed without further notice to Plaintiff.

As of the date of this Order, the Court has not received a letter or any other communication from Plaintiff. Nor has Plaintiff met the Court's deadline to serve defendants by July 10, 2008. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute the action, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to close this case.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Rose M. Singer Center

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 5, 2008
Case No. 07 Civ. 3988 (RJS) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 5, 2008)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Rose M. Singer Center

Case Details

Full title:EULALIA RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff. v. ROSE M. SINGER CENTER, ET AL., Defendants

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

Date published: Aug 5, 2008

Citations

Case No. 07 Civ. 3988 (RJS) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 5, 2008)