Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 9, 2022

Rodriguez Ramos v. Jay Global Enterprises, Inc.

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:21-cv-08617
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Rodriguez Ramos v. Jay Global Enterprises, Judge Cronan ordered a status letter and warned the case could be dismissed if Plaintiff did not comply.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Yelsom Emanuel Rodriguez Ramos, who was ordered to file the required status letter and proof of service; Defendants Jay Global Enterprises, Inc. and Gurum Corporation, whose case could be dismissed if Plaintiff failed to comply.

What happened

In Rodriguez Ramos v. Jay Global Enterprises, Inc., the court had ordered Plaintiff to report whether the amended summons and amended complaint had been served on Defendants and, if not, whether Plaintiff wanted more time to serve them.

The deadline for that report passed without Plaintiff filing it. The court gave Plaintiff until February 14, 2022, to file the status letter and any proof of service.

Judge John P. Cronan warned that the court may dismiss the case without further notice if Plaintiff did not file the required documents, citing the rules governing compliance with court orders and service of process.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rodriguez Ramos v. Jay Global Enterprises, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-08617
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
Feb. 9, 2022

Background

The court had previously ordered Plaintiff to file a status letter addressing two matters: whether Defendants had been served with the amended summons and Amended Complaint, and, if service had not occurred, whether Plaintiff requested additional time to complete service. The prior deadline passed, and Plaintiff did not file the required letter.

Court’s Action

The court ordered Plaintiff to file the status letter by February 14, 2022. The court also required Plaintiff to file proof of service on the docket if applicable. The opinion states that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 allows dismissal for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order, and that Rule 4(m) addresses the time for service.

Disposition and Effect

The court did not dismiss the case in this order. Instead, it warned that it may dismiss the case without further notice if Plaintiff failed to file the status letter and/or proof of service by February 14, 2022. This order directly imposed a filing obligation on Plaintiff and warned of a possible future dismissal affecting the action against Jay Global Enterprises, Inc. and Gurum Corporation.

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.