Contreras v. Pure Seasons, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:22-cv-00130
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Contreras v. Pure Seasons, Inc., Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case for failure to prosecute, allowing restoration by July 13, 2022.
Yensy Contreras and the proposed group of similarly situated people, as well as Pure Seasons, Inc.; the action was discontinued for failure to prosecute, subject to a restoration request by July 13, 2022.
What happened
In Contreras v. Pure Seasons, Inc., Yensy Contreras alleged that Pure Seasons did not provide a fully accessible website for visually impaired individuals, violating federal and New York City disability-discrimination laws.
The court directed Contreras to serve the summons and complaint and file proof of service. Contreras did not file the required proof of service or respond to later court communications and deadlines.
Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action for failure to prosecute, without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it by July 13, 2022. If no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Contreras v. Pure Seasons, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-00130
- Vyskocil
- June 13, 2022
Background
Yensy Contreras filed this putative class action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The complaint alleged that Pure Seasons, Inc. did not provide a fully accessible website for visually impaired individuals, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York City Human Rights Law.
Procedural History
The court received communications from individual employees of Pure Seasons stating that the website was fully accessible. The court also received communications stating that the entities identified in Contreras’s affidavit of summons and complaint had not been served. Contreras did not respond to those communications.
After a telephone hearing on April 20, 2022, the court ordered Contreras to serve Pure Seasons and file proof of service of the summons and complaint by May 20, 2022. Contreras filed proof that the court’s order had been served, but did not file proof that the summons and complaint had been served. On May 26, 2022, the court extended the deadline to June 10, 2022, and warned that failure to explain why service had not been made could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4 and 41. No response or proof of service was filed.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued for failure to prosecute, without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if Contreras applied to restore it by July 13, 2022. The order stated that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil therefore ended the case based on Contreras’s failure to serve the defendant and comply with the court’s orders, rather than deciding the accessibility claims on their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.