Tavarez-Vargas v. Bombay and Cedar, LLC
- Lewis Liman
- 1:21-cv-09861
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Tavarez-Vargas v. Bombay and Cedar, Judge Liman dismissed the case after the plaintiff failed to pursue it or follow court orders.
Carmen Tavarez-Vargas and the other people she sought to represent in the action; Bombay and Cedar, LLC was also affected by the case’s closure.
What happened
In Tavarez-Vargas v. Bombay and Cedar, LLC, the defendant never appeared. The plaintiff obtained a certificate of default but did not file the promised motion asking for a default judgment by the court-ordered deadline.
The court then ordered the plaintiff to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The plaintiff did not respond to that order, leaving the case at a standstill.
Judge Liman dismissed the case for failure to prosecute and directed the Clerk of Court to close it.
The detailed version
- Tavarez-Vargas v. Bombay and Cedar, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-09861
- Lewis Liman
- June 16, 2022
Background
Carmen Tavarez-Vargas filed the action individually and on behalf of others described as similarly situated. Bombay and Cedar, LLC never appeared. The court directed Tavarez-Vargas to file any request for default judgment by May 20, 2022. Although she obtained a certificate of default from the Clerk of Court, she did not file a motion for default judgment.
The court later ordered Tavarez-Vargas to show why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. She did not respond to that order.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 allows a court to dismiss an action on its own for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with a court order. It considered the required factors, including the length of the delay, notice that further delay could lead to dismissal, possible prejudice to the defendant, the court’s need to manage its docket, and whether lesser sanctions would be effective.
The court concluded that dismissal was appropriate. Tavarez-Vargas had represented that she would seek default judgment, failed to do so despite the court’s order, and then failed to respond to the order to show cause. The court stated that the case had reached a standstill and that a lesser sanction would be futile.
Disposition
The case was dismissed for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.