Campbell v. Isolator Fitness, Inc.
- Clarke
- 1:23-cv-02286
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Campbell v. Isolator Fitness: Judge Clarke dismissed the action without prejudice after Campbell failed to pursue it or follow court orders.
Jovan Campbell's action against Isolator Fitness, Inc. was dismissed without prejudice and the case was closed. Isolator Fitness, Inc. had been served but had not answered or otherwise appeared.
What happened
In Campbell v. Isolator Fitness, Inc., Jovan Campbell sued Isolator Fitness, Inc. The company was served but did not answer or otherwise appear. Campbell later asked for a judgment because the company had not responded, but a magistrate judge denied that request without prejudice and allowed Campbell to renew it by a deadline.
Campbell did not renew the request or take other action. The court then ordered Campbell to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to follow court orders or pursue the case. Campbell did not respond to that order either.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke dismissed the action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and close the case.
The detailed version
- Campbell v. Isolator Fitness, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-02286
- Clarke
- Jan. 9, 2024
Background
Jovan Campbell filed this action on March 17, 2023. Isolator Fitness, Inc. was served on April 25, 2023, but did not answer the complaint or otherwise appear.
On August 21, 2023, Campbell moved for default judgment, which is a request for judgment because the opposing party failed to respond. The court referred that motion to Magistrate Judge Moses. On October 3, 2023, Judge Moses denied the motion without prejudice because Campbell had disregarded applicable procedural rules and three prior court orders. Judge Moses permitted Campbell to renew the motion by November 3, 2023.
Campbell did not renew the motion or otherwise respond to that order. On November 7, 2023, Judge Moses ordered Campbell to explain in writing by November 14, 2023, why the action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with court orders or failure to prosecute. Campbell did not respond to the order to show cause or otherwise indicate an intention to pursue the case.
Ruling
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke dismissed the action without prejudice under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. That rule allows a district court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with court rules or a court order. The court stated that it had received no response from Campbell, including no indication that Campbell intended to continue the case.
The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.