Bishop v. Indeed Laboratories Usa Inc.

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: August 27, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-03350
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

CEDRIC BISHOP, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated,

Plaintiff, 25-CV-3350 (RA) v. ORDER INDEED LABORATORIES USA INC., Defendant.

RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge: Plaintiff commenced this action on April 22, 2025. On July 21, 2025, Plaintiff filed an Affidavit of Service stating that “Corporation Service Company” had been served by leaving the summons and complaint “in the basket.” To date, Defendant has not appeared. On August 20, 2025, this Court ordered Plaintiff to file a letter explaining his view as to whether and why service on Defendant was properly effectuated. In his August 21, 2025 response, Plaintiff asserted that service was proper because Corporation Service Company is the registered agent for Defendant, and because of representations the process server purportedly made to Plaintiff, but which are not reflected in the server’s affidavit. If Plaintiff intends to move for default judgment, he shall do so no later than September 26, 2025. In his moving papers, Plaintiff shall, among other things, state the legal basis—with supporting case law—for his view that service was properly effectuated on Defendant. Plaintiff may also submit an affidavit or other materials amending his proof of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)(3). Failure to file these submissions may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. See Le Sane v. Hall’s Sec. Analyst, Inc., 239 F.3d 206, 209 (2d Cir. 2001) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). SO ORDERED. Dated: August 27, 2025 (7 / New York, New York Ronnie Abrams United States District Judge