Brock v. CVS Corporation ( 2024 )

ee UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EE RO ET SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK bE ee □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ es SIRE TO TERRELL K. BROCK, : OES I □□ Plaintiff, □□□ HHH EL Gate og egg ORDER © eH es Yer □□□ 22 CV 4014 (VB) CVS CORPORATION, et al., : Defendants. : ek aw YE” On March 20, 2024, defendants the City of White Plains and Police Officers Jose Luis Formoso, Kevin Beall, Christopher Browning, Elisa DiPaterio, John Glynn, Todd Horgan, Michael Levito, Bradley Schneider, and Michael Vanderwalker (together, the “White Plains Defendants’? filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. #116). The docket reflects that the White Plains Defendants served plaintiff with a Notice to Pro Se Litigant Who Opposes a Motion for Summary Judgment and attached the full text of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. (Doc. #118). However, they failed to include the full text of Local Civil Rule 56.1, as required by Local Civil Rule 56.2. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the White Plains Defendants shall re-serve plaintiff with notice under Local Civil Rule 56.2 and attach the full texts of both Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Civil Rule 56.1. The White Plains Defendants shall file proof of service of same on the docket by March 28, 2024. Failure to serve and file such notice may result in denial of the White Plains Defendants’ motion. See Vital v. Interfaith Med. Cent., 168 F.3d 615, 621 (2d Cir. 1999); accord Thomas v. Jacobs, 2024 WL 631404 (2d Cir. Feb. 15, 2024) (summary order). Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address on the docket. Dated: March 21, 2024 , . □ White Plains, NY Copies Gaitogye Ch 3% □□□□□ SO ORDERED: Chambers o Vineos’, C □□ Vw [eu Bsa Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge