Scherr v. Spectrum Science Communications, Inc.
- Analisa Torres
- 1:20-cv-04422
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Scherr v. Spectrum Science, Judge Torres ordered the parties to report on a pending dismissal motion and warned that failure to proceed could lead to dismissal.
Nina Scherr, Spectrum Science Communications, Inc., and Michelle Strier were required to report to the court about the pending motion to dismiss. The order also warned Scherr that failure to proceed or comply with a court order could result in dismissal.
What happened
In Scherr v. Spectrum Science Communications, Inc., Defendants filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the case. The court had set deadlines for Plaintiff’s response and Defendants’ reply, but neither filing appeared on the docket.
The court ordered the parties to submit a letter by February 2, 2021, explaining what they intended to do about the dismissal motion. The opinion does not state that the court decided the motion itself.
Judge Analisa Torres reminded Plaintiff that the case could be dismissed if Plaintiff failed to pursue it or comply with the court’s rules or orders. The court did not dismiss the case in this order.
The detailed version
- Scherr v. Spectrum Science Communications, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-04422
- Analisa Torres
- Jan. 26, 2021
Background
On September 21, 2020, the court set a schedule for Defendants Spectrum Science Communications, Inc. and Michelle Strier to file a proposed motion to dismiss. Defendants filed that motion on October 26, 2020.
The court later extended the deadlines for Plaintiff Nina Scherr to oppose the motion and for Defendants to file a reply. The new deadlines were January 4, 2021, for Plaintiff’s opposition and January 25, 2021, for Defendants’ reply. Neither filing had been filed on the docket as of this order.
Order
The court ordered the parties to submit a letter by February 2, 2021, stating their intentions regarding the pending motion to dismiss. The court did not grant or deny that motion in this order.
Warning About Failure to Proceed
The court reminded Plaintiff that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) allows a court to dismiss an action if a plaintiff fails to pursue the case or comply with the federal rules or a court order. The opinion cited authority recognizing that a district court may dismiss a case on its own initiative for failure to pursue it. This order itself did not dismiss the action.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.