Doe 3 v. Indyke
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JANE DOE 3, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, 24-cv-1204 (AS) -against-
DARREN K. INDYKE and RICHARD D. ORDER KAHN, Defendants.
ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, United States District Judge: Further to the hearing held on October 9, 2024, plaintiff has advised the Court that it may soon move for leave to amend the complaint in this case to add a new named representative. Any forthcoming motion should address the following issues: 1. Plaintiff should explain the significant period of delay in moving for leave to amend. This suit was filed in February 2024. Dkt. 1. In March 2024, defendants indicated that they planned to move for disclosure of Doe’s identity if this suit survived their motion to dismiss. Dkt. 26. The Court denied in part defendants’ motion to dismiss on August 5, 2024, Dkt. 80, and defendants moved for disclosure the following week, Dkt. 81. So plaintiff has known for months that she might need to disclose her name to represent this class. When moving for leave to amend, “the longer the period of unexplained delay, the less will be required of the nonmoving party in terms of a showing of prejudice.” Block v. First Blood Ass’ns, 988 F.2d 344, 350 (2d Cir. 1993). What explains the delay here? 2. Plaintiff should address what would happen to the class claims if the Court were to deny the leave to amend, if disclosure is required, and if plaintiff elects to withdraw from the case. Would the new named representative be able to simply file a class complaint the next day, or would her claims be barred on any basis? If they would not be barred, for instance due to the operation of any applicable tolling doctrine, does that suggest that denial of leave to amend would not reduce any prejudice to defendants? 3. Finally, plaintiff should address what impact a second named representative would have on the disclosure issue, based on the Court’s analysis in its Opinion and Order at ECF No. 134.
SO ORDERED. Dated: October 11, 2024 New York, New York
ARUN SUBRAMANIAN United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Doe 3 v. Indyke (Doe 3 v. Indyke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.