Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 17, 2025

Regal Games LLC v. SellerX Eight GmbH, et al.

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:24-cv-04337
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Regal Games v. SellerX Eight, Judge Broderick gave Regal Games until November 24 to oppose defendants’ dismissal motion.

Who this affects

Regal Games LLC, which was given a deadline to respond to the defendants’ motion to dismiss; the defendants’ motion remained unresolved.

What happened

In Regal Games LLC v. SellerX Eight GmbH, et al., the defendants asked the court to dismiss Regal Games’ complaint. Regal Games’ response was due November 12, 2025, but it had not filed one by November 17.

The court ordered Regal Games to file any response by November 24, 2025. The court said it would treat the dismissal motion as unopposed if Regal Games missed that deadline and filed nothing else.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick did not decide the dismissal motion in this order. He instead set a new deadline for Regal Games to respond.

The detailed version

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

Case
Regal Games LLC v. SellerX Eight GmbH, et al. · No. 1:24-cv-04337
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Nov. 17, 2025

Background

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Regal Games LLC’s complaint on October 29, 2025. Under Local Civil Rule 6.1(b), Regal Games’ opposition was due November 12, 2025. The order states that Regal Games had not filed an opposition as of November 17.

Order

The court ordered Regal Games to file any opposition to the motion to dismiss no later than November 24, 2025. The court stated that if Regal Games did not oppose the motion or submit another filing by that date, it would consider the motion to dismiss unopposed.

The order cited a prior decision explaining that a plaintiff’s failure to respond to a motion to dismiss does not by itself require dismissal if the complaint adequately states a claim. This order did not rule on whether Regal Games’ complaint states a claim or otherwise decide the motion to dismiss.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.