Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 27, 2025

QUERYTRON LLC v. SHUTTERSTOCK, INC.

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:25-cv-04761
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Querytron LLC v. Shutterstock, Inc., Judge Cave deemed Shutterstock’s motion to strike moot after Querytron withdrew its amended complaint.

Who this affects

Querytron LLC and Shutterstock, Inc.; the order removed Shutterstock’s motion to strike the withdrawn First Amended Complaint from the court’s active docket.

What happened

Querytron LLC filed an amended complaint after Shutterstock moved to dismiss its original complaint. Shutterstock then moved to strike the amended complaint.

Querytron later withdrew that amended complaint and asked for permission to file a new proposed amended complaint. It argued that the withdrawal made Shutterstock’s motion to strike moot.

Judge Sarah L. Cave deemed the motion to strike moot and directed the clerk to close the motion at docket number 24. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
QUERYTRON LLC v. SHUTTERSTOCK, INC. · No. 1:25-cv-04761
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Oct. 27, 2025

Background

Querytron LLC filed a First Amended Complaint on September 18, 2025, in response to Shutterstock, Inc.’s motion to dismiss the original complaint. On September 25, Shutterstock filed a motion to strike the First Amended Complaint.

On October 23, Querytron withdrew the First Amended Complaint and filed a motion seeking permission to amend the complaint, together with a proposed amended complaint. Querytron also opposed Shutterstock’s motion to strike, arguing that the motion was moot because the First Amended Complaint had been withdrawn.

Ruling

Judge Sarah L. Cave held that the motion to strike was moot because the First Amended Complaint had been withdrawn. The court directed the clerk to close docket number 24, which contained Shutterstock’s motion to strike. The order did not resolve Shutterstock’s original motion to dismiss, Querytron’s motion for permission to amend, or the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.