Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 14, 2020

Prospero Tire Export, Inc. v. Maersk Line, Ltd

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:19-cv-08350
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Prospero Tire Export v. Maersk Line A/S, Judge Carter dismissed two plaintiffs’ claims without prejudice after they failed to retain new counsel.

Who this affects

Multi Recycling & Manufacturing Corp. and JDJ Recycling Guayama, Corp.; the court dismissed their claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

What happened

In Prospero Tire Export, Inc. v. Maersk Line A/S, the District of Puerto Rico gave Multi Recycling & Manufacturing Corp. and JDJ Recycling Guayama, Corp. 30 days to retain new counsel.

The plaintiffs did not retain new counsel by the deadline. The court therefore dismissed their claims without prejudice for failing to move the case forward.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. issued the order on April 14, 2020, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

The detailed version

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

Case
Prospero Tire Export, Inc. v. Maersk Line, Ltd · No. 1:19-cv-08350
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 14, 2020

Background

The action was originally filed in the District of Puerto Rico. On July 30, 2019, that court ordered Plaintiffs Multi Recycling & Manufacturing Corp. and JDJ Recycling Guayama, Corp. to retain new counsel within 30 days. The order warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal without prejudice of their claims.

Ruling

The plaintiffs had not retained new counsel by the time of this order. The court dismissed those plaintiffs’ claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The order cited Second Circuit authority recognizing that Rule 41(b) permits a district court to dismiss a plaintiff’s case on its own for failure to prosecute. The order did not decide the underlying merits of the claims.

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.