Vuppala v. 1411 Broadway Garage LLC
- Vyskocil
- 1:22-cv-08821
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Vuppala v. 1411 Broadway Garage, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action for failure to prosecute after Vuppala did not respond to the court’s order.
Kiran Vuppala’s action was discontinued for failure to prosecute, subject to possible restoration by May 5, 2023; the defendants were not required to answer before the action was discontinued.
What happened
In Vuppala v. 1411 Broadway Garage LLC, Kiran Vuppala sued 1411 Broadway Garage LLC and 1411 IC-SIC Property LLC. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.
The defendants did not timely answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. After the court gave Vuppala additional time and later ordered him to explain why the case should not be dismissed, Vuppala did not comply with that order or otherwise pursue the case.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the action discontinued for failure to prosecute, without costs to any party. The order allowed Vuppala to ask to restore the case to the court’s calendar by May 5, 2023; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Vuppala v. 1411 Broadway Garage LLC · No. 1:22-cv-08821
- Vyskocil
- Apr. 5, 2023
Background
Kiran Vuppala filed the complaint on October 16, 2022, against 1411 Broadway Garage LLC, doing business as City Parking, and 1411 IC-SIC Property LLC. Affidavits stating that the summons and complaint had been served were filed on December 17, 2022. The defendants’ responses were due on December 22, 2022, but they did not timely answer or otherwise respond.
Procedural History
The court first ordered Vuppala to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. Vuppala responded that there had been difficulties completing service and requested an additional 45 days for the defendants to answer. The court granted that request, but the defendants again did not timely respond.
The court then ordered Vuppala to explain by March 27, 2023 why the case should not be dismissed under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The opinion states that Vuppala did not comply with that order or otherwise prosecute the case.
Ruling
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that the action be discontinued for failure to prosecute, without costs to any party. The order stated that the action could be restored to the court’s calendar if Vuppala applied for restoration by May 5, 2023. If no such application was made by that date, the order stated that the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be pursued again. The court did not reach the merits of Vuppala’s claims.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court ended the case for failure to prosecute without deciding the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.