ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the defendants' motions were not untimely as a matter of law (see, 22 NYCRR 202.21[e]; CPLR 2103[b][2]; Levy v. Schaefer, 160 A.D.2d 1182). Since the defendants' motions were timely, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in directing the plaintiff's examination, as the defendants were only required to demonstrate that the action was not ready for trial (see, Audiovox Corp. v. Benyamini, 265 A.D.2d 135).
KRAUSMAN, J.P., LUCIANO, SMITH and ADAMS, JJ., concur.