ER TENNESSEE LLC v. 1322 DEVELOPMENTS, LLC, Tim RoAcH, AND HOLLY ROACH

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ER TENNESSEE LLC, ) ) Case No. 1:24-cv-06587-JHR ) Plaintiff, ) Judge Jennifer H. Rearden ) Defendants shall file a response to the instant Vv. ) motion no later than April 13, 2026. 1322 DEVELOPMENTS, LLC, Tim RoAcH, ) AND HOLLY ROACH, SO ORDERED. Defendants. ) Jgnnifer H. Rearden, U.S.DJ. Dated: April 6, 2026 PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL ER Tennessee LLC (“ER Tennessee” or “Plaintiff’), by its undersigned counsel, Chapman and Cutler LLP, respectfully moves the Court to dismiss this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). In support thereof, Plaintiff states as follows: 1. In July 2024, ER Tennessee filed this action for breach of contract in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. ECF #1-1. 2. Defendants 1322 Developments, LLC (““/322”), Holly Roach (“Holly”), and Tim Roach (“Jim”) (collectively the “Defendants”) removed the action to this Court on August 30, 2024. ECF #1. 3. On September 8, 2024, 1322 filed an answer and affirmative defenses to ER Tennessee’s Complaint. ECF #3 4. By order dated September 16, 2024, the Court found the Notice of Removal deficient (ECF #10) and ordered Defendants to file a renewed notice of removal, which they did on September 27, 2024. ECF #27. 5. Thereafter, ER Tennessee filed a letter motion dated November 18, 2024 seeking leave to amend their Complaint. ECF #21.

6. On March 18, 2026, the Court entered an order granting ER Tennessee’s Letter Motion and permitting ER Tennessee to file an amended complaint on or before April 2, 2026. The Court also denied the Tim and Holly’s motion to dismiss as moot and ordered Defendants to file a further amended notice of removal. ECF #24. 7. On March 23, 2026, Defendants filed a second amended notice of removal

(erroneously titled First Amended Notice of Removal). ECF #25. 8. Rather than file its Amended Complaint, ER Tennessee seeks to voluntarily dismiss this matter, as is its right. Ibeto Petrochem. Indus. Ltd. v. M/T “Beffen”, 412 F.Supp. 2d 285, 290 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (citing Jones v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 298 U.S. 1, 14 (1936)). 9. This case was dormant for over a year and Defendants have not answered or pleaded to the proposed amended complaint, as it has not yet been filed. As such, Defendants will not suffer any prejudice resulting from a voluntary dismissal of this action. 10. ER Tennessee requested that Defendants stipulate to dismissal but have received no response.

11. Attached hereto as Exhibit A to this Motion is a proposed Order dismissing this matter. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff ER Tennessee LLC respectfully requests that the Court enter the attached Order dismissing this action without prejudice, with each party to bear their own fees and costs. DATED: April 2, 2026 Respectfully submitted, ER TENNESSEE LLC,

By /s/ Joseph P. Lombardo One of Its Attorneys Joseph P. Lombardo (lombardo@chapman.com) CHAPMAN AND CUTLER LLP 320 South Canal Street Chicago, Illinois 60606 (312)845-3000 (312)701-2361 (Fax)