Cordero v. Portable Therapeutix, LLC
- Jesse Furman
- 1:22-cv-05705
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Cordero v. Portable Therapeutix, Judge Furman vacated a prior order and extended Defendant’s answer deadline after its late filing.
Rafael Cordero, Portable Therapeutix, LLC, and Portable Therapeutix’s defense counsel.
What happened
In Cordero v. Portable Therapeutix, LLC, the defendant failed to respond by the required deadline, and the court ordered Rafael Cordero to seek a judgment because of that failure.
The defendant filed its answer the next day. The court noted that federal appeals courts prefer resolving disputes based on their merits rather than by default.
Judge Furman vacated the October 19 order and extended the answer deadline to October 21, 2022. He also warned defense counsel that further failures to follow deadlines, rules, or court orders could lead to sanctions.
The detailed version
- Cordero v. Portable Therapeutix, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-05705
- Jesse Furman
- Oct. 21, 2022
Background
Portable Therapeutix, LLC was required to answer or otherwise respond to Rafael Cordero’s complaint but did not do so by the deadline. On October 19, 2022, the court ordered Cordero to move for default judgment, which is a judgment based on a party’s failure to respond.
The next day, Portable Therapeutix filed its answer. The court cited the strong preference for resolving disputes on their merits.
Ruling
The court vacated its October 19, 2022 order and extended the answer deadline, retroactively, to October 21, 2022. The court also cautioned defense counsel about repeated failures in this and other cases to follow deadlines, rules, and court orders. It warned that future failures may result in sanctions. The opinion did not decide the merits of Cordero’s claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.