Cathy Areu v. Fox News Network, LLC et al, No. 1:2020cv08678 - Document 71 (S.D.N.Y. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER: On September 9, 2021, the Court issued an order and opinion granting Defendants' motion to dismiss but permitted Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. Dkt. 54. The Court ordered that "if she so chooses, Plaintiff must file a n amended complaint no later than September 30, 2021," and warned that "failure to file an amended complaint by that date will result in dismissal of this action with prejudice." Id. Plaintiff subsequently requested an extension due to substitution of new counsel; the Court granted her application and ordered Plaintiff to submit her amended complaint by October 14, 2021. Dkt. 63. Plaintiff has not since filed an amended complaint. Accordingly, this case is dismissed, with prejudice. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 11/15/2021) (tg)

Download PDF
Cathy Areu v. Fox News Network, LLC et al Doc. 71 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CATHY AREU, Plaintiff, v. 20-CV-8678 (RA) FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC, ED HENRY, SEAN HANNITY, TUCKER CARLSON, and HOWARD KURTZ, ORDER Defendants. RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge: On September 9, 2021, the Court issued an order and opinion granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss but permitted Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. Dkt. 54. The Court ordered that “if she so chooses, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint no later than September 30, 2021,” and warned that “failure to file an amended complaint by that date will result in dismissal of this action with prejudice.” Id. Plaintiff subsequently requested an extension due to substitution of new counsel; the Court granted her application and ordered Plaintiff to submit her amended complaint by October 14, 2021. Dkt. 63. Plaintiff has not since filed an amended complaint. Accordingly, this case is dismissed, with prejudice. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 15, 2021 New York, New York RONNIE ABRAMS United States District Judge Dockets.Justia.com

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.