J.L. v. New York City Department of Education et al

Filing 245

ORDER: Accordingly, by Tuesday, May 9, 2023, Plaintiff shall file unredacted versions of its Memorandum of Law and accompanying declarations and exhibits under seal (which shall be provisional). By Monday, May 15, 2023, Plaintiff shall publicly file a redacted version of these documents in accordance with their Motion to Seal. On Monday, May 15, 2023, Plaintiff shall also file a revised letter motion to seal that explains for each proposed redaction why the redaction is necessary. After that date, the Court will determine whether the submissions filed under seal may remain under seal. The deadline for Defendants' cross-motion and opposition is extended to July 7, 2023. The deadline for Plaintiffs' opposition and reply is extended to July 28, 2023. The deadline for Defendants' reply is extended to August 18, 2023. The Court also notes that after Plaintiffs filed the Notice of Motion, Defendants filed an Answer to the Complaint. In the event Plaintiff seeks to withdraw its Motion for Default Judgment and submit a brief that only concerns the Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff shall file a letter no later than Tuesday, May 9, 2023 advising the Court of this decision and, if needed, proposing a s hort extension of the above deadlines to allow it time to make the necessary revisions. The parties are reminded of their option pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to consent to decision of the action, or a specific motion, by the undersigned Magistrate Judge. If all parties consent to decision of the Motions for Default/Summary Judgment by the undersigned, they shall complete the Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge on a Specific Motion Form, as further set forth in this Order. SO ORDERED. ( Brief due by 5/9/2023., Cross Motions due by 7/7/2023., Motions due by 5/15/2023., Replies due by 8/18/2023., Responses due by 7/28/2023) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 5/5/2023) (vfr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
J.L., on behalf of J.P., et al.,
Plaintiffs,

17-CV-7150 (PAC) (KHP)
ORDER

-againstNEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, et al.,

5/5/2023

Defendants.

-----------------------------------------------------------------X
KATHARINE H. PARKER, United States Magistrate Judge.
On April 28, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Motion stating it was moving for an
order of default judgment against Defendants for failure to file an answer, and for
summary judgment on certain claims. (ECF No. 240.) The Notice of Motion references an
“accompanying Memorandum of Law,” but no such Memorandum was filed. On May 5,
2023, the Honorable Paul A. Crotty referred this motion to me for a Report and
Recommendation. (ECF No. 244.)
At the same time that Plaintiffs filed their Notice of Motion, they also filed a Motion
to Seal their Memorandum of Law in support of the Motion for Default Judgment and
Summary Judgment along with supporting declarations and exhibits. (ECF No. 239.) On
May 1, 2023, I issued an order informing Plaintiff that it had failed to file the underlying
documents that were the subject of its Motion to Seal and directing Plaintiff to file those
documents under seal in the first instance so that the Court can properly evaluate the
Motion to Seal. I also advised Plaintiff to meet and confer with Defendants to ensure that
any proposed redactions were narrowly tailored. (ECF No. 243.) I granted Plaintiff until

Monday, May 15, 2023 to file a more narrowly tailored Motion to Seal in the event the
meet and confer process led to an agreement to do so.
To date, Plaintiffs have not filed a Memorandum of Law in support of their Motion
for Default Judgment and Motion for Summary Judgment, nor have they filed any
documents in support of the Motions, either in a publicly viewable redacted form or in an
unredacted form under seal. Accordingly, by Tuesday, May 9, 2023, Plaintiff shall file
unredacted versions of its Memorandum of Law and accompanying declarations and
exhibits under seal (which shall be provisional). By Monday, May 15, 2023, Plaintiff shall
publicly file a redacted version of these documents in accordance with their Motion to
Seal. On Monday, May 15, 2023, Plaintiff shall also file a revised letter motion to seal that
explains for each proposed redaction why the redaction is necessary. After that date, the
Court will determine whether the submissions filed under seal may remain under seal.
The deadline for Defendants’ cross-motion and opposition is extended to July 7,
2023. The deadline for Plaintiffs’ opposition and reply is extended to July 28, 2023. The
deadline for Defendants’ reply is extended to August 18, 2023.
The Court also notes that after Plaintiffs filed the Notice of Motion, Defendants filed
an Answer to the Complaint. In the event Plaintiff seeks to withdraw its Motion for Default
Judgment and submit a brief that only concerns the Motion for Summary Judgment,
Plaintiff shall file a letter no later than Tuesday, May 9, 2023 advising the Court of this
decision and, if needed, proposing a short extension of the above deadlines to allow it time
to make the necessary revisions.

2

The parties are reminded of their option pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to consent
to decision of the action, or a specific motion, by the undersigned Magistrate Judge. If all
parties consent to decision of the Motions for Default/Summary Judgment by the
undersigned, they shall complete the Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge on a
Specific Motion Form available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/201806/AO-4.pdf and return the form to the Clerk of the Court. If the parties consent to the
undersigned’s jurisdiction over the action in its entirety, they shall complete the form
available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf and return it to
the Clerk of the Court. This Order is not meant to interfere in any way with the parties’
absolute right to decision by a U.S. District Judge, but it is merely an attempt at preserving
scarce judicial resources and reminding the parties of their option pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c). Withholding consent will not result in any adverse consequences, however
consenting to a Magistrate Judge’s jurisdiction may result in a faster resolution of the
motions. If the parties withhold their consent, the undersigned will remain referred to
issue a Report and Recommendation on the Motion for Default/Summary Judgment, for
General Pretrial management, and for settlement.
SO ORDERED.
DATED:

New York, New York
May 5, 2023
______________________________
KATHARINE H. PARKER
United States Magistrate Judge

3