Garcia v. Rebecca Minkoff LLC

Filing 41

ORDER: Accordingly, if Plaintiff intends to seek a default judgment against Defendant Rebecca Minkoff LLC, she is directed to do so in accordance with Rule 4(H) of my Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases by no later than August 5, 2022. If Plaintiff fails to do so or otherwise demonstrate that she intends to prosecute this litigation against Defendant Rebecca Minkoff LLC, I will dismiss this case against Defendant Rebecca Minkoff LLC for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 8/2/2022) (ate)

Case 1:22-cv-01912-VSB Document 41 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------X
:
VICTORIA N. GARCIA,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-against:
:
REBECCA MINKOFF LLC, et al.,
:
:
Defendants. :
:
--------------------------------------------------------- X

22-CV-1912 (VSB)
ORDER

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff filed this action on March 4, 2022, (Doc. 1), and filed affidavits of service on
July 7, 2022, (Docs. 25, 26). The deadline for Defendants Rebecca Minkoff LLC and Sunrise
Brands LLC to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint was July 13, 2022. (See Docs. 25, 26.) On July
15, 2022, I ordered that if Plaintiff intended to seek a default judgment against Defendants,
Plaintiff should do so in accordance with Rule 4(H) of my Individual Rules and Practices in Civil
Cases by no later than July 22, 2022. (Doc. 33.) I warned Plaintiff, “If Plaintiff fails to do so or
otherwise demonstrate that she intends to prosecute this litigation, I may dismiss this case for
failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).” (Id.) On July 15, 2022,
Defendant Sunrise Brands LLC appeared and requested an extension of time to respond to the
complaint. (Docs. 30, 31.) To date, Defendant Rebecca Minkoff LLC has not appeared or
responded to the complaint.
On July 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a proposed clerk’s certificate of default against
Defendant Rebecca Minkoff LLC, and an affirmation in support. (Docs. 37, 38.) However,
Plaintiff’s proposed clerk’s certificate of default was deficient, and Plaintiff did not comply with
the other requirements of Rule 4(H) of my Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases.

Case 1:22-cv-01912-VSB Document 41 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, if Plaintiff intends to seek a default judgment against Defendant Rebecca Minkoff
LLC, she is directed to do so in accordance with Rule 4(H) of my Individual Rules and Practices
in Civil Cases by no later than August 5, 2022. If Plaintiff fails to do so or otherwise
demonstrate that she intends to prosecute this litigation against Defendant Rebecca Minkoff
LLC, I will dismiss this case against Defendant Rebecca Minkoff LLC for failure to prosecute
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 2, 2022
New York, New York

________________________________
VERNON S. BRODERICK
United States District Judge