Robles v. Budkoin LLC
Primitivo Robles, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated v. Budkoin LLC
- Vargas
- 1:24-cv-07508
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Primitivo Robles v. Budkoin LLC, Judge Vargas dismissed the case without prejudice after Robles failed to prosecute.
Primitivo Robles and Budkoin LLC; the case was closed after dismissal without prejudice for Robles’s failure to prosecute.
What happened
Primitivo Robles v. Budkoin LLC was dismissed after Robles took no action in the case after April 15, 2025. A magistrate judge ordered him to explain in writing by September 8 why the case should not be dismissed, but he did not respond.
The court considered dismissal for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). It noted that dismissal is a severe sanction and that courts consider the length of the delay, notice of possible dismissal, prejudice from further delay, docket management, and whether a less severe penalty would be appropriate.
Judge Jeannette A. Vargas ruled that dismissal was warranted because Robles had notice of the order and did not comply. The case was dismissed without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court was directed to close it.
The detailed version
- Robles v. Budkoin LLC · No. 1:24-cv-07508
- Vargas
- Oct. 16, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Primitivo Robles had not taken any action on the docket since April 15, 2025. On August 28, 2025, Magistrate Judge Lehrburger ordered Robles to show good cause in writing by September 8, 2025, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Robles did not respond to that order, and no other docket activity occurred after the response deadline.
Legal standard
The court relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits a court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute or fails to comply with a court order. The court stated that dismissal for failure to prosecute is a severe sanction reserved for extreme circumstances. It considered the five factors identified by the Second Circuit: the duration of the plaintiff’s failure to comply, whether the plaintiff had notice that dismissal could result, likely prejudice to the defendants from further delay, the balance between managing the court’s docket and giving the plaintiff a fair opportunity to be heard, and whether the court considered a less severe sanction.
Ruling
The court concluded that dismissal was warranted because Robles had been notified that he needed to explain why the case should not be dismissed and had not complied with the August 28 order. Judge Jeannette A. Vargas ordered that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
Disposition
The case was dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.