Reyes v. City of New York

Background

Nardo B. Reyes brought an employment-discrimination action against the City of New York on October 20, 2014. He was representing himself. The court allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee, but the order was returned as undeliverable.

The court later ordered Reyes either to return the forms needed for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant or to tell the court that he would serve the defendant himself. The order warned that failing to comply could lead to dismissal under Rule 41(b), which allows a court to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied five factors used to evaluate a dismissal for failure to prosecute: the length of the plaintiff’s delay; whether the plaintiff received notice that further delay could lead to dismissal; likely prejudice to the defendant from additional delay; the need to balance court efficiency with the plaintiff’s opportunity to be heard; and whether lesser sanctions would be effective.

The court found that all five factors supported dismissal. Reyes’s only action had been filing the complaint nearly six years earlier. He had not kept the court informed of his current address, had not completed service, and had not contacted the court. The court also noted that he had been warned that failure to comply with court orders could result in dismissal. It concluded that allowing the case to remain open would be unfair to other litigants waiting for the court’s attention.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos dismissed Reyes’s action with prejudice under Rule 41(b) for his total failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.