Torres v. Golden Home Furniture Inc. d/b/a Golden Home Furniture
Sergio Torres, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Golden Home Furniture Inc. d/b/a Golden Home Furniture; 7 Star Home Furniture Inc. d/b/a 7 Star Furniture; Mohammad Aldaou; Frank Doe; and David Aldaou a/k/a Akman
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-04789
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Torres v. Golden Home, Judge Vyskocil denied default judgment without prejudice and ordered Torres to show cause why the case should not be dismissed.
Torres’s motion for default judgment against Golden Home Furniture Inc. and 7 Star Home Furniture Inc. was denied without prejudice to renewal. Torres was ordered to show cause by November 13, 2025, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute.
What happened
Sergio Torres sued Golden Home Furniture Inc. and 7 Star Home Furniture Inc., among others. Torres later voluntarily dismissed the claims against three individual defendants. The court first entered defaults against the two remaining corporate defendants, but later vacated those defaults after the companies appeared and answered. After their lawyer withdrew, the companies did not retain new lawyers, as the court had ordered.
Torres moved for default judgment based on the companies’ failure to comply with the order requiring new counsel. He relied on clerk’s certificates of default issued in March 2022, but those certificates had been issued before the defaults were later vacated. The court ordered Torres to explain why it could rely on those certificates, but Torres did not respond.
Judge Vyskocil denied Torres’s motion for default judgment without prejudice to renewal. She also ordered Torres to explain in writing by November 13, 2025, why the case should not be dismissed for failing to follow the court’s order and for failing to prosecute the case. The order warned that failing to respond could lead to dismissal.
The detailed version
- Torres v. Golden Home Furniture Inc. d/b/a Golden Home Furniture · No. 1:20-cv-04789
- Vyskocil
- Nov. 6, 2025
Background
Torres filed this case in June 2020. He voluntarily dismissed the case against Mohammad Aldaou, Frank Doe, and David Aldaou. The remaining defendants were Golden Home Furniture Inc. and 7 Star Home Furniture Inc. The court initially entered defaults against those companies because they had not appeared and answered, but later vacated the defaults after the companies appeared and answered.
The court later allowed the companies’ lawyer to withdraw because the lawyer could not contact the companies and the companies had not paid legal fees. The court warned that corporations cannot represent themselves in federal court and ordered the companies to retain new counsel and have that lawyer file an appearance within 30 days. The companies did not comply.
Motion for Default Judgment
Torres moved for default judgment based on the companies’ failure to comply with the order requiring them to retain new counsel. In support, he submitted clerk’s certificates of default issued in March 2022. Those certificates had been issued because the companies had not then filed an answer or otherwise responded to the complaint. The opinion states that the court had previously vacated the defaults after the companies appeared and answered.
On August 20, 2025, the court ordered Torres to show cause—that is, explain in writing—why it could rely on the March 2022 certificates. Torres did not respond by the deadline or by the date of this order, even though the court stated that he had been given ample time.
Ruling
The court denied Torres’s pending motion for default judgment as to Golden Home and 7 Star “without prejudice to renewal.” The court also ordered Torres, by November 13, 2025, to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the court’s order and failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. Judge Vyskocil warned that a failure to respond on time could result in dismissal under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The clerk was directed to terminate docket entry 155.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.