Crown Sterling Limited LLC v. UBM LLC a/k/a Black Hat USA
- Vyskocil
- 1:19-cv-07900
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Crown Sterling v. UBM, Judge Vyskocil granted dismissal against UBM and discontinued the case against unnamed defendants for failure to prosecute.
Crown Sterling Limited LLC, UBM LLC a/k/a Black Hat USA, and the unnamed defendants identified as Does 1–10.
What happened
Crown Sterling Limited LLC filed this case against UBM LLC, also known as Black Hat USA, and unnamed defendants identified as Does 1–10. No proof of service was filed, and no activity occurred to name or serve the unnamed defendants.
Crown Sterling submitted a voluntary dismissal concerning UBM LLC, stating that the dismissal was with prejudice. The court granted that dismissal. It also discontinued the case against Does 1–10 for failure to prosecute, without costs and without prejudice to restoring the case by June 11, 2020.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no application to restore the case was made by June 11, 2020, the dismissal would apply to all defendants and would be with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Crown Sterling Limited LLC v. UBM LLC a/k/a Black Hat USA · No. 1:19-cv-07900
- Vyskocil
- May 12, 2020
Background
Crown Sterling Limited LLC filed the complaint on August 22, 2019, against UBM LLC, also known as Black Hat USA, and Does 1–10. The docket contained no proof that any defendant had been served. The opinion also states that there had been no activity to name or serve Does 1–10.
On May 8, 2020, Crown Sterling filed a stipulation of voluntary dismissal concerning UBM LLC. The stipulation listed the dismissal as being with prejudice.
Ruling
The court granted the stipulation of voluntary dismissal against UBM LLC.
The court also discontinued the suit against Does 1–10 for failure to prosecute, meaning the case was not being pursued against those defendants. That discontinuance was without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar, provided an application to restore it was made by June 11, 2020. The court stated that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would apply to all defendants and would be with prejudice.
Disposition
The dismissal against UBM LLC was granted as requested in the stipulation. The action against Does 1–10 was discontinued for failure to prosecute, subject to the stated deadline for seeking restoration.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.