Rodriguez v. Massive Action, LLC

S.D. New York

Rodriguez v. Massive Action, LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided July 9, 2021·No. 1:21-cv-02973·Unknown

Opinion

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED . nnn nnn nnn nnn DOC #: _ DATE FILED: _7/8/2021 JOSE RODRIGUEZ, : Plaintiff, : : 21-CV-2973 (VSB) -against- : : ORDER MASSIVE ACTION LLC, et al., : Defendants. :

wane eee KX VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: On April 7, 2021, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendants Massive Action, LLC, RedBubble, Inc., TP Apparel, LLC, Zazzle, Inc., Etsy, Inc., Amazon.com, LLC, Shopify (USA), Inc., and Nordstrom, Inc. (Doc. 1.) A summons was issued on April 7, 2021. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an affidavit of service or taken any other action to prosecute this case. Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that, no later than July 22, 2021, Plaintiff shall submit a letter of no more than three (3) pages, supported by legal authority, demonstrating good cause as to why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). “Good cause is generally found only in exceptional circumstances where the plaintiff's failure to serve process in a timely manner was the result of circumstances beyond its control.” E. Refractories Co. v. Forty Eight Insulations, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 503, 505 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (internal quotation marks omitted). “District courts consider the diligence of plaintiff's efforts to effect proper service and any prejudice suffered by the defendant as a consequence of the delay.” /d. (internal quotation marks omitted). “An attorney's inadvertence, neglect, mistake or misplaced reliance does not constitute good cause.” Howard v. Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler, 977 F Supp. 654, 658

(S.D.N.Y.1997) (citing McGregor v. United States, 933 F.2d 156, 160 (2d Cir.1991), aff'd, 173 F.3d 844 (2d Cir.1999)). Plaintiff is warned that failure to submit a letter and to demonstrate good cause for failure to serve Defendants within ninety days after the complaint was filed will result in dismissal of this action. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to Pro Se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. , Dated: July 8, 2021 i UST U . { ) New York, New York MLUTWAD AION 14 VERNON S. BRODERICK United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED . nnn nnn nnn nnn DOC #: _ DATE FILED: _7/8/2021 JOSE RODRIGUEZ, : Plaintiff, : : 21-CV-2973 (VSB) -against- : : ORDER MASSIVE ACTION LLC, et al., : Defendants. :

wane eee KX VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: On April 7, 2021, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendants Massive Action, LLC, RedBubble, Inc., TP Apparel, LLC, Zazzle, Inc., Etsy, Inc., Amazon.com, LLC, Shopify (USA), Inc., and Nordstrom, Inc. (Doc. 1.) A summons was issued on April 7, 2021. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an affidavit of service or taken any other action to prosecute this case. Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that, no later than July 22, 2021, Plaintiff shall submit a letter of no more than three (3) pages, supported by legal authority, demonstrating good cause as to why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). “Good cause is generally found only in exceptional circumstances where the plaintiff's failure to serve process in a timely manner was the result of circumstances beyond its control.” E. Refractories Co. v. Forty Eight Insulations, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 503, 505 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (internal quotation marks omitted). “District courts consider the diligence of plaintiff's efforts to effect proper service and any prejudice suffered by the defendant as a consequence of the delay.” /d. (internal quotation marks omitted). “An attorney's inadvertence, neglect, mistake or misplaced reliance does not constitute good cause.” Howard v. Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler, 977 F Supp. 654, 658

(S.D.N.Y.1997) (citing McGregor v. United States, 933 F.2d 156, 160 (2d Cir.1991), aff'd, 173 F.3d 844 (2d Cir.1999)). Plaintiff is warned that failure to submit a letter and to demonstrate good cause for failure to serve Defendants within ninety days after the complaint was filed will result in dismissal of this action. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this order to Pro Se Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. , Dated: July 8, 2021 i UST U . { ) New York, New York MLUTWAD AION 14 VERNON S. BRODERICK United States District Judge

Rodriguez v. Massive Action, LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Pincite

Rodriguez v. Massive Action, LLC (Rodriguez v. Massive Action, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related