Campbell v. Fischer & Wieser Specialty Foods, Inc.
- Rearden
- 1:22-cv-09791
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Campbell v. Fischer & Wieser Specialty Foods, Judge Rearden dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Jovan Campbell’s case was dismissed without prejudice and closed because he did not take the required steps to move it forward. Fischer & Wieser Specialty Foods, Inc. was not required to defend the case after it failed to respond or appear.
What happened
Jovan Campbell filed a lawsuit against Fischer & Wieser Specialty Foods, Inc. The company was served but did not respond or appear.
The court later ordered Campbell to explain why the case should not be dismissed and told him how to seek a default judgment. Campbell took no further action.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute and directed the Clerk of Court to close it.
The detailed version
- Campbell v. Fischer & Wieser Specialty Foods, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-09791
- Rearden
- June 14, 2023
Background
Jovan Campbell filed the complaint on November 17, 2022. Fischer & Wieser Specialty Foods, Inc. was served with the complaint on December 6, 2022, and its response was due on December 27, 2022. The company did not respond or otherwise appear.
Court’s Order to Show Cause
On May 8, 2023, the court ordered Campbell to show why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. The order stated that Campbell could show cause by requesting a certificate of default from the Clerk of Court and filing a motion for default judgment by May 15, 2023. Campbell did not request a certificate of default, file a motion for default judgment, or otherwise take action to move the case forward.
Ruling
Under Rule 41(b) and the court’s inherent power to manage its cases, Judge Jennifer H. Rearden dismissed the case, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.