DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the record demonstrates that the Supreme Court dismissed his first action because he failed to obtain personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Accordingly, the plaintiff was not entitled to invoke the six-month extension contained in CPLR 205(a) to recommence his terminated action ( see Schiavone v. 801 S. Fulton Ave. Co., 295 A.D.2d 493; County of Rockland v. Coakely, 235 A.D.2d 782; cf. Matter of Winston v. Freshwater Wetlands Appeals Bd., 224 A.D.2d 160). Since the CPLR 205(a) extension was not available, the plaintiff's second action, which was commenced after the expiration of the three-year statute of limitations, was time-barred ( see Schiavone v. 801 S. Fulton Ave. Co., supra).
SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.