Minden Pictures Inc. v. PanaGenius Inc.
Filing
40
ORDER denying 28 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; granting 35 CROSS MOTION to Withdraw admissions pursuant to FRCP 36: Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment (ECF No. 28) is DENIED and Defendant's cross-motion to withdraw admissions (ECF No. 35) is GRANTED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 11/18/2021) (Aaron, Stewart)
Case 1:21-cv-02312-SDA Document 40 Filed 11/18/21 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
11/18/2021
Minden Pictures Inc.,
Plaintiff,
-against-
1:21-cv-02312 (SDA)
ORDER
PanaGenius Inc. d/b/a Face2Face Africa,
Defendant.
STEWART D. AARON, United States Magistrate Judge:
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment based upon
Defendant’s failure to respond to Plaintiff’s requests for admissions (Pl.’s 10/29/21 Mot., ECF No.
28), and Defendant’s cross-motion to withdraw admissions. (Def.’s 11/8/21 Cross-Mot., ECF No.
35.)
While it is true that, under the rule, “[a] matter is admitted unless, within 30 days after
being served, the party to whom the request is directed serves on the requesting party a written
answer or objection,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3), the rule also allows the Court to permit the
withdrawal or amendment of an admission if (1) “it would promote the presentation of the merits
of the action,” and (2) “the court is not persuaded that it would prejudice” the party who
requested the admission. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(b). Given that (1) Defendant filed an affirmation and
memorandum of law setting forth possible defenses to infringement (see Michelen Aff., ECF No.
36, ¶¶ 14-16; Def.’s Mem., ECF No. 37, at 6), 1 and (2) Plaintiff never asked the Court to compel a
response to the admissions requests in accordance with the Court's Individual Rules (even though
The Court declines to engage in a merits analysis at this stage, given that discovery is not yet complete.
(See 9/17/21 Order, ECF No. 25 (setting December 12, 2021 as deadline to complete discovery).)
1
Case 1:21-cv-02312-SDA Document 40 Filed 11/18/21 Page 2 of 2
Plaintiff asked the Court to compel responses to its interrogatories and document requests (see
Pl.’s 10/22/21 Ltr. Mot., ECF No. 26) 2), the Court declines to find that Defendant admitted
copyright infringement for purposes of partial summary judgment.
Thus, Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment (ECF No. 28) is DENIED and
Defendant’s cross-motion to withdraw admissions (ECF No. 35) is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
New York, New York
November 18, 2021
______________________________
STEWART D. AARON
United States Magistrate Judge
On October 28, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to interrogatories and
document requests after Defendant failed to timely respond to that motion. (See 10/28/21 Order, ECF
No. 27.)
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?