The reports of defendants' experts, based on examinations performed more than two years after the accident and addressed only to the permanency of plaintiffs injuries, failed to make a prima facie showing that plaintiff had not sustained a 90/180-day injury ( see Alexandre v Dweck, 44 AD3d 597; Loesburg v Jovanovic, 264 AD2d 301). Nor did defendants submit any other evidence to show that plaintiff did not sustain such an injury. However, the court properly granted summary judgment with respect to alleged permanent injury and significant limitations, since plaintiffs experts failed to respond sufficiently to defendants' evidence on those claims.