Yu v. Froneri US, Inc.
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-08512
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Yu v. Froneri, Judge Nathan ordered Lauren Yu to state whether she will amend her complaint after Froneri’s motion to dismiss.
Lauren Yu and Froneri US, Inc.
What happened
In Yu v. Froneri US, Inc., Froneri US, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss Lauren Yu’s complaint on March 5, 2021.
The court required Yu to notify the court and Froneri in writing by March 18 whether she would amend her complaint or rely on the existing pleading. The order warned that declining to amend in response to arguments in the motion might waive her ability to use amendment to correct defects identified in the briefing.
Judge Nathan did not decide the motion to dismiss. The order stated that if Yu amended, Froneri could answer, file a new motion to dismiss, or rely on its original motion.
The detailed version
- Yu v. Froneri US, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-08512
- Edgardo Ramos
- Mar. 9, 2021
Background
On March 5, 2021, Froneri US, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss Lauren Yu’s complaint. The order was issued under Rule 3.F of the court’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases.
Order
The court required Yu, by March 18, 2021, to notify the court and Froneri in writing whether she intended to file an amended pleading and when she would do so, or whether she would rely on the complaint being challenged. The court warned that declining to amend in a timely response to a fully briefed argument in Froneri’s motion might constitute a waiver of Yu’s right to use the amendment process to cure defects made apparent by Froneri’s briefing.
If Yu amended her pleading, Froneri could file an answer, file a new motion to dismiss, or submit a letter stating that it would rely on its original motion. The order also stated that it did not change the deadlines for amending, answering, or filing a motion under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules.
Disposition
Judge Alison J. Nathan did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss. The order addressed the procedure for Yu’s possible amendment and Froneri’s possible response.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.