DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff's motion papers were not adequate to establish that the case should be restored to the trial calendar (see, Rudy v. Chasky, 260 A.D.2d 625; Iazzetta v. Vicenzi, 243 A.D.2d 540). Moreover, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in rejecting the plaintiff's untimely reply papers (see, CPLR 2214[c]; Foitl v. G.A.F. Corporation, 64 N.Y.2d 911). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff's motion.
The plaintiff's remaining contentions need not be addressed in light of our determination.