Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 29, 2023

Gannon v. Hua Da Inc

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:22-cv-01650
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Motion to DismissCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Gannon v. Hua Da Inc., Judge Furman granted defendants’ motions to dismiss without prejudice to suit in state court and closed the case.

Who this affects

Stephen Gannon and the defendants; the case was closed after judgment for the defendants, with the dismissal stated to be without prejudice to filing suit in state court.

What happened

Gannon v. Hua Da Inc. was brought by Stephen Gannon individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against Hua Da Inc. and other defendants.

The court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss without prejudice to filing suit in state court. The court had previously allowed Gannon to amend, but he did not identify additional facts that would fix the problems or ask to amend again. Judgment was entered for the defendants, and the case was closed.

Judge Jesse Furman’s March 28, 2023 memorandum opinion and order supplied the reasons for the judgment entered on March 29, 2023.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gannon v. Hua Da Inc · No. 1:22-cv-01650
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Mar. 29, 2023

Background

Stephen Gannon sued Hua Da Inc. and other defendants individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. The judgment refers to the court’s memorandum opinion and order dated March 28, 2023, but the provided text does not describe the underlying claims or the court’s reasoning.

Ruling

The court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss, stating that the dismissal was without prejudice to filing suit in state court. The court also stated that it had previously granted Gannon leave to amend. Because Gannon neither identified additional facts that would cure the defects discussed in the earlier ruling nor requested another opportunity to amend, the court declined to grant another opportunity on its own. Judgment was entered in favor of the defendants, and the case was closed.

Effect

The judgment resolved the federal district court case in the defendants’ favor. The text expressly preserved the possibility of filing suit in state court. The judgment was entered by the clerk, while the supplied case information identifies Jesse Furman as the judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.