Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 13, 2020

Angeles v. Need Supply Company

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:20-cv-07099
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Angeles v. Need Supply Company, Judge Torres ordered a joint case-management filing by November 16 after missed deadlines and warned of possible dismissal.

Who this affects

The plaintiff and defendant were required to file a joint letter and proposed case-management plan by November 16, 2020. The plaintiff was warned that continued failure to comply with court orders could lead to dismissal under Rule 41(b).

What happened

In Angeles v. Need Supply Company, the court addressed the parties’ failure to submit a required joint letter and proposed case-management plan before an initial conference.

The court had set an October 28 deadline, which the parties missed, and then set a November 12 deadline. The November 12 submissions were overdue when the court issued this order.

Judge Analisa Torres ordered the parties to file the joint letter and proposed plan by November 16. She reminded the plaintiff that continued failure to follow court orders could lead to dismissal under Rule 41(b), but this order did not dismiss the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Angeles v. Need Supply Company · No. 1:20-cv-07099
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Nov. 13, 2020

Background

On September 16, 2020, the court ordered the parties to submit a joint letter and proposed case-management plan by October 28, 2020, before the initial pretrial conference scheduled for November 4, 2020. The parties did not comply.

On November 2, 2020, the court issued another order requiring the parties to submit the same materials by November 12, 2020, before the initial pretrial conference scheduled for November 19, 2020. The court stated that those submissions were overdue.

Court’s Analysis

The court stated that the plaintiff had failed to comply with multiple court orders. It reminded the plaintiff that Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to pursue the case or obey federal rules or a court order. The court also stated that a district court may issue such a dismissal on its own initiative for failure to pursue the case.

Disposition

The court ordered the parties to file the joint letter and proposed case-management plan by November 16, 2020. The order warned about the possibility of dismissal under Rule 41(b), but it did not dismiss the action or otherwise state that a dismissal had been entered.

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.