Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 22, 2020

Bowen v. 5600 LLC

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:19-cv-10765
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Daniel Bowen v. Cohen’s General Dental, Judge Broderick dismissed the action because Bowen failed to prosecute and obey a court order.

Who this affects

Daniel Bowen and the defendants in the action; the case was dismissed and the Clerk of Court was directed to close it.

What happened

Daniel Bowen sued Cohen’s General Dental, PLLC, and others. After Tommy’s West 231* Realties Inc. was served, it did not respond to the amended complaint, and Bowen did not take steps to move the case forward.

The court ordered Bowen to file a status update explaining whether he intended to continue prosecuting the case. Bowen did not file the update or take further action.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick dismissed the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Bowen v. 5600 LLC · No. 1:19-cv-10765
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
June 22, 2020

Background

Daniel Bowen filed the action on November 20, 2019, and filed an amended complaint on March 6, 2020. Bowen served Tommy’s West 231* Realties Inc. on March 10, 2020. That defendant’s deadline to respond was March 31, 2020, but it did not appear or respond to the amended complaint.

The opinion states that Bowen took no action to prosecute the case after the defendant failed to respond. On June 2, 2020, the court notified Bowen that he had to continue prosecuting the case and ordered him to file a status update by June 19, 2020, stating whether he intended to continue. Bowen did not file the status update or take further action.

Rule and Analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) allows a court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or a court order. The court relied on both grounds: Bowen did not try to move the case forward after a defendant failed to answer, and he did not comply with the June 2 order.

Disposition

Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered that the action be dismissed under Rule 41(b). The order did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

Scope of the Ruling

The opinion concerns Bowen’s failure to prosecute and failure to follow the court’s order. It does not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.