NDF1 v. Boysen
- Clarke
- 7:25-cv-01603
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In NDF1 v. Boysen, Judge Clarke denied default judgment against Midland Credit without prejudice and denied it against Kurt Boysen as moot.
NDF1, LLC, Midland Credit, Kurt Boysen, and the court docket entry addressed by the Clerk’s directive.
What happened
NDF1, LLC sought default judgment against Midland Credit and Kurt Boysen in this action. The opinion says Midland Credit had not appeared, while Boysen had appeared and answered.
The court denied the motion against Midland Credit without prejudice because it was premature. It denied the motion against Kurt Boysen as moot, meaning the court found no live issue for that request after his appearance and answer. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate docket entry 29.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke issued the order on November 12, 2025. The court relied on reasons stated during a conference and on an earlier related proceeding, but this order does not describe those reasons in detail.
The detailed version
- NDF1 v. Boysen · No. 7:25-cv-01603
- Clarke
- Nov. 12, 2025
Background
NDF1, LLC filed this action and moved for default judgment, which is a judgment requested because a defendant has not appeared or defended. The motion addressed two defendants: Midland Credit, described as a non-appearing defendant, and Kurt Boysen. The order states that Boysen had appeared and filed an answer, citing ECF Nos. 41–42. It also refers to a parties’ stipulation at ECF No. 38.
Rulings
The court denied without prejudice the motion for default judgment against Midland Credit as premature. “Without prejudice” means the order does not itself bar a later request, although the opinion does not state what future filing would be permitted or when.
The court denied as moot the motion for default judgment against Kurt Boysen. The order links that ruling to Boysen’s appearance and answer and the parties’ stipulation. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 29.
Reasoning and disposition
The court stated that its decision was based on reasons given on the record at the November 12, 2025 conference and on an earlier related proceeding, cited at 754 F. Supp. 3d 273 (E.D.N.Y. 2024). The order does not provide the conference explanation or further details about the earlier proceeding. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke signed the order. Because the court ruled on a request for default judgment without deciding the underlying claims, this is a procedural order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.