ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted by the respondent.
The appellant established a prima facie case that the injuries sustained by the respondent were not serious within the meaning of Insurance Law — 5102(d) by submitting an affirmed report of a board-certified neurologist, who examined the respondent and concluded that "there is no disability" (see, Gaddy v. Eyler, 79 N.Y.2d 955, 956-957). The medical evidence submitted by the respondent in opposition to the motion, a report prepared by a board-certified psychiatrist, was neither sworn to nor affirmed to be true under penalty of perjury, and thus did not constitute competent evidence (see, CPLR 2106; Moore v. Tappen, 242 A.D.2d 526). Accordingly, the respondent failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether she sustained a serious injury.