Zuru PTE. v. Individuals
Zuru (Singapore) PTE., Ltd. v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A hereto
- Vyskocil
- 1:21-cv-09817
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Zuru v. The Individuals, Judge Vyskocil ordered a default-judgment motion by April 1, 2022 or warned the case may be dismissed.
Zuru (Singapore) PTE., Ltd., ZURU LLC, and ZURU INC. were directed to file any default-judgment motion by April 1, 2022. The remaining defendants were warned that the case could proceed toward default judgment if they did not respond.
What happened
Zuru (Singapore) PTE., Ltd., ZURU LLC, and ZURU INC. sued the defendants identified on Schedule A. The complaint was filed on November 23, 2021, and the opinion states that the defendants did not respond after being served.
Because no responses were filed and the plaintiffs had not pursued the case, the court ordered that any motion for a default judgment against remaining defendants be filed by April 1, 2022. The court directed the plaintiffs to follow its procedures for default judgments.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil warned that failing to file the motion by that date may result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute. The order did not itself enter a default judgment or dismiss the case.
The detailed version
- Zuru PTE. v. Individuals · No. 1:21-cv-09817
- Vyskocil
- Mar. 11, 2022
Background
Zuru (Singapore) PTE., Ltd., ZURU LLC, and ZURU INC. filed the complaint on November 23, 2021. The docket later included an affidavit stating that the defendants had been served with the summons and complaint. The opinion states that the defendants’ responses were due January 11, 2022, but that no responses were filed. It also states that the plaintiffs had not prosecuted the case to date.
Court’s action
The court ordered that any motion for entry of a default judgment against any remaining defendants be filed by April 1, 2022. A default judgment is a judgment that may be entered when a defendant fails to respond or otherwise defend. The court directed the plaintiffs to follow the procedures in the court’s Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases.
Warning and disposition
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil warned that failure to move for a default judgment by April 1, 2022 may result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The order did not grant or deny a default-judgment motion, enter a default judgment, or dismiss the action.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.