Parisienne v. Source Digital, Inc.
- Andrew Carter
- 1:20-cv-04220
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Parisienne v. Source Digital, Inc., Judge Carter ordered Parisienne to file a motion for default judgment by November 30, warning that failure could lead to dismissal.
The order directly affects Theodore Parisienne, who was required to file a motion for default judgment by November 30, 2020. Source Digital, Inc. could be affected if the court later considers that motion or dismisses the case.
What happened
In Parisienne v. Source Digital, Inc., the court said it had received Theodore Parisienne’s response to an earlier order requiring him to explain why the case should continue. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
The court ordered Parisienne to file a motion for default judgment by November 30, 2020. It warned that failing to do so might lead to dismissal for failure to prosecute.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. did not dismiss the case or grant default judgment in this order; he set a deadline and warned of a possible future dismissal.
The detailed version
- Parisienne v. Source Digital, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-04220
- Andrew Carter
- Nov. 9, 2020
Background
Theodore Parisienne sued Source Digital, Inc. The opinion states that the court received Parisienne’s response to an order to show cause issued on October 20, 2020. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or explain the basis for the requested default judgment.
Order
The court ordered Parisienne to file a motion for default judgment by November 30, 2020. A default judgment is a judgment requested when a party has not defended against a case, but the opinion does not provide further details about the circumstances here.
The court warned that failing to file the motion could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute—that is, failure to move the case forward—under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Disposition
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. issued the order on November 9, 2020. The order did not dismiss the case and did not grant or deny a motion for default judgment; it set a deadline and warned of a possible future dismissal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.