Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 10, 2023

Molina v. 517 West Properties, LLC

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:22-cv-03839
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Molina v. 517 West Properties, Judge Carter dismissed the case without prejudice after Molina failed to respond to a court order.

Who this affects

Giovanny Ramirez Molina and the similarly situated persons he sought to represent; the case against 517 West Properties, LLC, and Isaac Wettenstein was dismissed without prejudice.

What happened

Molina v. 517 West Properties, LLC involved Giovanny Ramirez Molina’s lawsuit against 517 West Properties, LLC, and Isaac Wettenstein, brought on behalf of himself and similarly situated people.

The court had ordered Molina to explain by March 17, 2023 why the case should not be dismissed for failing to prosecute it. Molina did not respond to that order.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The opinion did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Molina v. 517 West Properties, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-03839
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 10, 2023

Background

Giovanny Ramirez Molina sued 517 West Properties, LLC, and Isaac Wettenstein on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated persons. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Procedural history

On March 3, 2023, the court ordered Molina to show cause—meaning to explain—by March 17, 2023 why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The opinion states that Molina had not responded to the order as of April 10, 2023.

Ruling

The court dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b). “Without prejudice” means the dismissal did not bar a later filing based on the same matter. The court did not reach the merits of Molina’s claims.

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.