Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant moved pursuant to CPLR 3126 to dismiss the complaint based on the plaintiff's repeated failure to comply with court-ordered discovery. The motion was granted upon the plaintiff's default in opposing it.
The plaintiff did not demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his failure to oppose the motion ( see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]). Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his repeated failures to comply with the court's directives and the defendant's discovery demands ( see Rodriguez v. New York Methodist Hosp., 3 AD3d 526; Scoca v. Bon Realty Corp., 284 AD2d 388; Wynne v. Wagner, 262 AD2d 556; Kolajo v. City of New York, 248 AD2d 512; Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to vacate.