Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 23, 2022

Tavenner v. International Business Machines Corp.

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:21-cv-06345
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Tavenner v. International Business Machines Corp., Judge Karas granted International Business Machines Corp.’s motion, denied Tavenner’s summary-judgment motion as moot, dismissed her claims with prejudice, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Deborah Tavenner’s claims against International Business Machines Corp. were dismissed with prejudice, and the case was closed. The court also denied Tavenner’s summary-judgment motion as moot.

What happened

In Tavenner v. International Business Machines Corp., the court granted the defendant’s motion. The judgment does not identify the motion’s type or explain the underlying dispute, but it says the ruling was based on the court’s Opinion and Order dated September 23, 2022.

The court denied Deborah Tavenner’s motion for summary judgment as moot, meaning the court found it unnecessary to decide that motion. The court also dismissed Tavenner’s claims with prejudice and closed the case.

Judge Kenneth Karas is identified as the judge. The judgment is dated September 23, 2022, and was entered in the Southern District of New York.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tavenner v. International Business Machines Corp. · No. 7:21-cv-06345
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Sept. 23, 2022

Background

The provided text is a judgment in Deborah Tavenner’s case against International Business Machines Corp. The judgment states that it was issued for the reasons given in the court’s separate Opinion and Order dated September 23, 2022. That separate opinion is not included in the provided text, so the underlying claims, arguments, and reasoning are not described here.

Rulings

The court granted International Business Machines Corp.’s motion. The judgment does not state what type of motion it was or identify the specific relief requested.

The court denied Tavenner’s motion for summary judgment as moot. This means the court did not need to decide that motion after ruling on the defendant’s motion.

The court also dismissed Tavenner’s claims with prejudice. The judgment therefore treats the claims as finally dismissed and states that the case is closed.

Disposition

The defendant’s motion was granted; Tavenner’s motion for summary judgment was denied as moot; Tavenner’s claims were dismissed with prejudice; and the case was closed. The judgment was entered by Clerk Ruby J. Krajick. Judge Kenneth Karas is identified in the supplied case information, but the judgment itself is signed by the clerk.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.