Weitzner v. Cynosure, Inc., No. 14-723 (2d Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs appealed the district court's dismissal of their complaint under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227, for failure to file a timely appeal because of plaintiffs' compliance with an individual calendar rule promulgated by a district judge. The court concluded that plaintiffs' dilatory motion for reconsideration failed to toll the time to appeal under FRAP 12 Rule 4(a)(4)(A)(vi), and plaintiffs’ notice of appeal was filed more than a year after judgment entered against them. Accordingly, under FRAP Rule 4(a)(1)(A) and 28 U.S.C. 2107(a), the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to hear this appeal.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on October 27, 2015.
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.