Shteierman v. Fisher

Background

On October 29, 2024, the court vacated the entry of default against Hillel Fisher and Israel Meir Farkash. It ordered each defendant to provide current home and business addresses within 10 days. Fisher later filed a letter motion seeking to transfer venue. The court then ordered each defendant to file a letter listing addresses to facilitate service. Farkash filed a letter motion seeking reconsideration of the October 29 and November 11 orders.

Court’s action

Because of the consideration generally given to parties representing themselves, the court construed Fisher’s and Farkash’s letter motions as providing their addresses in compliance with the court’s orders. The court instructed Yitzchok Shteierman to properly serve the defendants by December 30, 2024.

Once served, the defendants must answer or otherwise respond to the complaint within 21 days of service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1). The order did not decide Fisher’s request to transfer venue or Farkash’s request for reconsideration.

Warning about failure to prosecute

Judge Kenneth M. Karas stated that if Shteierman fails to properly serve the defendants by December 30, 2024, the court will consider the defendants’ motions and may dismiss Shteierman’s claims for failure to prosecute. Failure to prosecute means failing to move the case forward. The order cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal of an action for that reason.

Disposition

The court treated the defendants’ letters as address disclosures, set a service deadline, and deferred consideration of the defendants’ motions unless service was not completed by the deadline. The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied either motion.