
    Bernarda Almanzar, Appellant, v Carmen Rijos, D.D.S., et al., Respondents.
    [67 NYS3d 465]
   Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered September 16, 2016, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants met their prima facie burden through their experts’ opinions that defendant dentist properly performed a mandibular block injection before filling plaintiff’s cavities and that the injection could not have injured the nerves plaintiff claimed to have been injured (see Fernandez v Moskowitz, 85 AD3d 566, 567-568 [1st Dept 2011]).

In opposition, plaintiff’s experts failed to address how the procedure could have caused the claimed injuries or any other injuries (see id.). Further, neither expert opined as to how, or in what manner, the procedure was improperly performed. Thus, the opinions were too conclusory to raise an issue of fact on the question of malpractice (see Rodriguez v Montefiore Med. Ctr., 28 AD3d 357, 357 [1st Dept 2006]). In light of that finding, we need not reach the question of whether plaintiff impermissibly raised new claims of injury in opposition to defendants’ motion.

Concur—Friedman, J.P., Gische, Mazzarelli, Kern, Singh, JJ.  