Marc Tetro, Inc. v. Treboux, 19-cv-2691 (PKC). (2020)
Court: District Court, S.D. New York
Number: infdco20200204792
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jan. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2020
Summary: ORDER P. KEVIN CASTEL , District Judge . In its opposition to plaintiff's motion to dismiss, defendant asserts that it served plaintiff with the Complaint on September 24, 2019 pursuant to the Court's Order of September 23, 2019. As proof of service, it refers to a docket entry of October 18, 2019 reflecting an affidavit of service. (DE 24.) But the affidavit of service at DE24 does not refer to service of the Complaint on September 24 but rather to service of the October 11, 2019 Order (DE
Summary: ORDER P. KEVIN CASTEL , District Judge . In its opposition to plaintiff's motion to dismiss, defendant asserts that it served plaintiff with the Complaint on September 24, 2019 pursuant to the Court's Order of September 23, 2019. As proof of service, it refers to a docket entry of October 18, 2019 reflecting an affidavit of service. (DE 24.) But the affidavit of service at DE24 does not refer to service of the Complaint on September 24 but rather to service of the October 11, 2019 Order (DE ..
More
ORDER
P. KEVIN CASTEL, District Judge.
In its opposition to plaintiff's motion to dismiss, defendant asserts that it served plaintiff with the Complaint on September 24, 2019 pursuant to the Court's Order of September 23, 2019. As proof of service, it refers to a docket entry of October 18, 2019 reflecting an affidavit of service. (DE 24.) But the affidavit of service at DE24 does not refer to service of the Complaint on September 24 but rather to service of the October 11, 2019 Order (DE 23) on October 14, 2019.
Thus far, plaintiff has not shown proof of service of the Complaint. File proof of service and explanation of the discrepancy within seven days.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
