The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell and Richard Rozhik of counsel), for appellant. Foley, Smith, O'Boyle & Weisman (Eric W. Ostrager and Anastasiya Nabatova of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Rupert V. Barry, J.), dated January 14, 2022. The order denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court (Rupert V. Barry, J.) dated January 14, 2022, which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

In support of its cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground of lack of coverage, defendant, a self-insurer, relied on the assignor's sworn application for no-fault benefits (NF-2) and on a search of defendant's own records. Together they demonstrated, prima facie, that none of defendant's vehicles were involved in an accident with plaintiff's assignor on the day in question (see Jesa Med. Supply, Inc. v NYC Tr. Auth., 38 Misc 3d 138[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 50188[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2013]) and that plaintiff's assignor was driving a vehicle which was not owned by defendant. In opposition, plaintiff failed to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact. Consequently, defendant, a self-insurer, was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]; 11 NYCRR § 65-2.2 [a], [j] [3]; Complete Med. Care Svcs of NY, P.C. v N.Y.C. Tr. Auth., 49 Misc 3d 10 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2015]; Jesa Med. Supply, Inc., 2013 NY Slip Op 50188[U]).

In view of the foregoing, plaintiff's remaining contentions lack merit.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

TOUSSAINT, P.J., BUGGS and OTTLEY, JJ., concur.