Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 23, 2023

Jimenez v. Herrera Montiel

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:23-cv-08086
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jimenez v. Herrera Montiel, Judge Engelmayer dismissed the case without prejudice because the plaintiffs failed to prosecute it.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and defendant in this case; the case was dismissed without prejudice and closed after the plaintiffs failed to take required action.

What happened

In Jimenez v. Herrera Montiel, the plaintiffs filed a complaint, but the court later instructed them to address an apparent problem with federal jurisdiction by September 26, 2023. They did not respond or take other action in the case.

The court then ordered the plaintiffs to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to prosecute it. The order warned that not responding by October 17, 2023, would lead to dismissal without prejudice. The plaintiffs still did not act.

Judge Engelmayer dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the court’s inherent authority because of the plaintiffs’ failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jimenez v. Herrera Montiel · No. 1:23-cv-08086
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Oct. 23, 2023

Background

The plaintiffs filed the complaint on September 12, 2023. On September 19, 2023, the court ordered them to address an apparent jurisdictional defect by September 26, 2023. The plaintiffs did not respond and took no other action in the case.

On October 10, 2023, the court issued an order to show cause—an order requiring the plaintiffs to explain why the case should not be dismissed—for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. That order warned that failure to act by October 17, 2023, would result in dismissal without prejudice. The plaintiffs did not take action after receiving that order.

Ruling

The court dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the court’s inherent authority. The stated basis was the plaintiffs’ failure to prosecute, meaning their failure to take the steps needed to move the case forward. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.