Since a dismissal premised on lack of standing is not a dismissal on the merits for res judicata purposes, plaintiff is not precluded from reasserting the same claims based on newly conferred rights which cure the prior lack of capacity (see Alco Gravure v. Knapp Found., 64 N.Y.2d 458, 465; Tong v. Hang Seng Bank, 210 A.D.2d 99, 100). The dismissal of plaintiff's prior action, based on the determination that plaintiff neither owned the intellectual property at issue, nor had an express assignment of the rights thereto (see Pullman Group, LLC v. The Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 288 A.D.2d 2), is therefore not a bar to the instant action.
We have considered defendants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.