Opinion
01 CV 4599 (ILG)
June 20, 2002
MEMORANDUM ORDER
On February 22, 2002, plaintiff moved for summary judgment in this student loan case. Plaintiff, however, does not appear to have satisfied its obligation, under Local Rule 56.2 of this Court, of notifying the pro se defendant of the consequences of failing to respond to its summary judgment motion. See Vital v. Interfaith Med. Ctr., 168 F.3d 615, 620 (2d Cir. 1999); Champion v. Artuz, 76 F.3d 483. 486 (2d Cir. 1996). Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied, without prejudice to renewal upon serving the defendant with the notice required by Local Rule 56.2.
SO ORDERED.