Smith v. Evans et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
WILLIAM D. SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL EVANS et al.,
Defendants.
21-CV-188-LJV-MJR
DECISION & ORDER
On June 9, 2025, the defendants—Paul Evans, Sharade Aldinger, Alfonso
Harris, and Deanna Lates—moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims for failure to
prosecute. Docket Item 63. This Court then issued a scheduling order requiring the pro
se plaintiff, William D. Smith, to respond by July 1, 2025. Docket Item 64. When Smith
did not respond by the deadline, on December 1, 2025, this Court ordered him to show
cause “why his claims should not be deemed abandoned and dismissed” based on his
failure to respond to the motion to dismiss. Docket Item 65; see, e.g., Johnson v.
Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 519 F. Supp. 2d 448, 448-49 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (noting that
because the plaintiff failed to respond to motion to dismiss, the Court “may deem [the
plaintiff’s] claims as abandoned”); Palmer v. BCE Inc., 2004 WL 1752601, at *2
(W.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2004) (stating that the plaintiff’s “failure to respond to [the]
defendant’s motion to dismiss evidences his abandonment of the action”). The Court
cautioned that “[i]f Smith d[id] not respond by” December 31, 2025, “this Court w[ould]
deem his claims abandoned and grant the motion to dismiss on that basis.” Docket
Item 65.
Case 1:21-cv-00188-LJV-MJR Document 66 Filed 01/12/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Smith failed to respond to this Court’s order to show cause, and the time to do so
has passed. See id. Accordingly, in light of Smith’s failure to respond, this Court
hereby deems his claims abandoned and GRANTS the defendants’ motion to dismiss,
Docket Item 63. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: 	January 12, 2026
Buffalo, New York
/s/ Lawrence J. Vilardo
LAWRENCE J. VILARDO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:21-cv-00188-LJV-MJR Document 66 Filed 01/12/26 Page 2 of 2