Taveras v. New York City, New York et al
Filing
49
ORDER granting 44 Motion for Summary Judgment. Accordingly, Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice as to its renewal, following the resolution of the pending motion to dismiss. Any such renewal should be f iled in accordance with the Court's Individual Rules. As a reminder, Defendant's reply in further support of their motion to dismiss is due on or before January 27, 2023. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 44. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 1/17/2023) (rro)
Case 1:20-cv-01200-KPF Document 49 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ALAN TAVERAS,
Plaintiff,
-v.NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK; JONATHAN DAVID,
in his official capacity as Director, NYPD License
Division; ASIF IQBAL, in his official capacity as
Executive Director, License Division Rifle/Shotgun
Section; DERMOT SHEA, in his official capacity as
Police Commissioner, and all successors therein; and
KEECHANT SEWELL, in her official capacity as
NYPD police commissioner and all successors,
20 Civ. 1200 (KPF)
ORDER
Defendants.
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge:
On November 15, 2022, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s
Second Amended Complaint without first filing a pre-motion letter requesting a
conference as required by Rule 4(A) of the Court’s Individual Rules of Practice
in Civil Cases (the “Individual Rules”). (See Dkt. #38-40). The Court accepted
Defendants’ motion but instructed the parties to review the Individual Rules
and expressed its expectation that “the parties … will take care to comply with
[the Individual Rules] going forward.” (Dkt. #41). The Court also set a briefing
schedule for Defendants' motion. (Id.). On January 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed an
opposition to Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss in accordance with that
briefing schedule. (See Dkt. #41, 43).
Along with his opposition, Plaintiff filed a cross-motion for summary
judgment. (See Dkt. #44-48). Plaintiff did not file a pre-motion letter nor
Case 1:20-cv-01200-KPF Document 49 Filed 01/17/23 Page 2 of 2
otherwise seek the Court’s leave to file that motion. This failure to file a premotion letter violated Individual Rule 4(A). Plaintiff’s summary judgment
motion is premature for an additional reason: It will only be necessary to
address the issues raised in Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion in the event
that Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss is denied.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED
without prejudice as to its renewal, following the resolution of the pending
motion to dismiss. Any such renewal should be filed in accordance with the
Court’s Individual Rules. As a reminder, Defendant’s reply in further support
of their motion to dismiss is due on or before January 27, 2023. The Clerk of
Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 44.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 17, 2023
New York, New York
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA
United States District Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?