DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d), the defendant failed to establish his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955). The affirmed reports of the defendant's medical experts did not set forth the objective tests they performed during their examinations of the plaintiff which led them to conclude that she did not suffer a limitation to the range of motion in her neck (see Junco v. Ranzi, 288 A.D.2d 440).
SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.