Carattini v. Behun
- Nelson Roman
- 7:21-cv-09373
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Eric C. Carattini v. Christopher Behun, Judge Roman dismissed the action with prejudice after Carattini failed to prosecute and missed multiple conferences.
Eric C. Carattini’s action against Christopher Behun was dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court also directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion and the action.
What happened
Eric C. Carattini sued Christopher Behun in claims described as arising under Bivens. Carattini represented himself, filed an amended complaint and a second amended complaint, and continued with the case for several years.
The court said Carattini did not help prepare a required joint case-management plan and failed to attend conferences on June 9, June 20, July 8, and July 22, 2025. Neither side objected to Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause’s recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Judge Nelson S. Roman reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted it in full. The action was dismissed with prejudice because Carattini failed to prosecute, and the court directed the clerk to terminate the case.
The detailed version
- Carattini v. Behun · No. 7:21-cv-09373
- Nelson Roman
- Dec. 3, 2025
Background
Eric C. Carattini, who represented himself, brought this action against Christopher Behun on or about October 25, 2021. The opinion describes Carattini’s claims as arising under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Carattini later filed an amended complaint and a second amended complaint.
Case-management history
The parties were ordered to confer and submit a joint case-management plan. The opinion states that defense counsel made repeated attempts to communicate with Carattini, but the parties did not submit a joint plan. The court later issued a case-management plan and referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause for pretrial matters.
Carattini failed to appear at multiple scheduled case conferences, including conferences on June 9, June 20, July 8, and July 22, 2025. Magistrate Judge Krause issued a report and recommendation advising that the action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Neither Carattini nor Behun filed objections within the applicable period.
Court’s analysis
Because no timely objections were filed, Judge Roman reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error. The court found no clear error and stated that the recommendation was supported by the facts and law.
The court applied the factors used for dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute. Those factors include the length of the delay, notice that additional delay could lead to dismissal, likely prejudice to the defendant, the balance between court-calendar concerns and the plaintiff’s opportunity to be heard, and whether lesser sanctions would be effective. The court stated that all five factors supported dismissal.
Disposition
Judge Roman adopted Magistrate Judge Krause’s report and recommendation in its entirety. The action was dismissed with prejudice because of Carattini’s failure to prosecute. The clerk was directed to mail the opinion to Carattini, terminate the motion at ECF No. 92, and terminate the action.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.