Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc.

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: March 11, 2024
• Docket: 1:20-cv-04583
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

DELOECCUTMREONNTICALLY FILED DOC #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DATE FILED: 3/11/2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK PENSKE MEDIA CORPORATION, Plaintiff, 1:20-cv-04583 (MKV) -against- ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CROSS MOTIONS SHUTTERSTOCK, INC., FOR SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT Defendant. MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, United States District Judge: Plaintiff Penske Media Corporation (“PMC”) brought this action against Shutterstock, Inc. (“Shutterstock”), originally asserting a myriad of federal and state claims in connection with the breakdown of an agreement between the parties precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The parties subsequently filed a Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal of all federal claims [ECF No. 178], leaving only their competing state law breach of contract claims (and related claims for frustration of purpose doctrine and restitution after rescission). The parties now cross-move for summary judgment on the surviving contract-related claims. The Court, as it is independently obligated to do, has assessed whether it has subject matter jurisdiction in connection with this action. See Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428, 434 (2011); In re Tronox Inc., 855 F.3d 84, 95 (2d Cir. 2017); see e.g., Digitel, Inc. v. MCI Worldcom, Inc., 239 F.3d 187, 189-90 (2d Cir. 2001) (affirming the district court’s sua sponte dismissal on subject- matter jurisdiction grounds); Curcio v. Abrams, No. 22-693, 2023 WL 31183, at *2 (2d Cir. Jan. 4, 2023) (summary order) (affirming the district court’s sua sponte dismissal). After review, the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice based on the apparent lack of subject matter jurisdiction in light of the parties’ voluntary discontinuance of the claims upon which federal jurisdiction was invoked. [ECF No. 178]. The Court will simultaneously enter a scheduling order to afford the parties an opportunity to be heard with respect to the Court’s inclination to dismiss this case without prejudice under Section 1367(c), which provides that “[t]he district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under [§ 1367(a)].” For the foregoing reasons, the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment are DENIED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close docket entry numbers 167 and 169. SO ORDERED. Koy Viyekeroll Date: March 11, 2024 Let Ha Mal New York, NY United States District Judge