Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Robin S. Garson, J.), entered March 19, 2012. The order denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint or, in the alternative, to reduce plaintiff's ad damnum clause.

ORDERED that the order is modified by providing that the branch of defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a claim for $3,112.85 is granted; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no fault benefits, defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action had been commenced after the statute of limitations had expired or, in the alternative, to reduce plaintiff's ad damnum clause.

A defendant moving for dismissal on statute of limitations grounds bears the initial burden of establishing, prima facie, that the time in which to commence the action has expired (see 6D Farm Corp. v Carr, 63 AD3d 903 [2009]; Island ADC, Inc. v Baldassano Architectural Group, P.C., 49 AD3d 815 [2008]). In this case, MVAIC established that so much of the action as sought to recover upon a claim for $3,112.85 had been commenced after the expiration of the statute of limitations. In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to its timeliness (see New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens v Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp., 12 AD3d 429, 429 [2004]; Precision Radiology Servs., P.C. v MVAIC, 34 Misc 3d 126[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 52274[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]).

With respect to so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a claim for $5,009, the record does not establish all of the facts necessary to determine when the cause of action accrued (see e.g. Hospital for Joint Diseases v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 8 AD3d 533 [2004]). As a result, defendant failed to prove, as a matter of law, that so much of the action as sought to recover upon this claim is barred by the statute of limitations (see Bell Air Med. Supply, LLC v MVAIC, 16 Misc 3d 135[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 51607[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]).

Defendant's contention regarding the ad damnum clause lacks merit.

Accordingly, the order is modified by providing that the branch of defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon a [*2]claim for $3,112.85 is granted.

Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.