Pascual v. Delta Faucet Company

Filing 5

ORDER. No later than the earlier of 100 days from the date of this Order or two weeks after Defendant appears in the case, the parties shall file a joint letter (unless Defendant has not appeared, in which case Plaintiff shall file the letter individually), not to exceed two pages, including the following information in separately numbered paragraphs as further set forth in this Order. Counsel who have entered a notice of appearance as of the issuance of this order are directed (1) to notify counsel for all other parties in this action who have not yet appeared by serving upon each of them a copy of this order and the Court's Individual Rules and Practices forthwith, and (2) to file proof of such notice with the Court. If unaware of the identity of counsel for any of the parties, counsel receiving this order must fo1ihwith send a copy of this order and the Court's Individual Rules and Practices to that party personally. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/4/21) (yv)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X
:
DOMINGO PASCUAL,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-v:
:
DELTA FAUCET COMPANY,
:
:
Defendant.
:
:
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

21-CV-4937 (JMF)
ORDER

JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired
customers and, thus, violates Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C.
§ 12181 et seq. In the Court’s experience, the vast majority of cases involving such claims are
resolved early — often without even an initial pretrial conference.
Accordingly, no later than the earlier of 100 days from the date of this Order or two
weeks after Defendant appears in the case, the parties shall file a joint letter (unless Defendant
has not appeared, in which case Plaintiff shall file the letter individually), not to exceed two
pages, including the following information in separately numbered paragraphs:
(1)

Unless Defendant has already answered, the date on which Plaintiff served
Defendant with the Complaint and Defendant’s deadline to answer. (If Plaintiff
has not served Defendant within 90 days of filing the Complaint, in accordance
with Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and filed proof of such
service on the docket, the case may be dismissed on that basis.)

(2)

A brief description of any discovery that has already taken place and of any
discovery that is necessary for the parties to engage in meaningful settlement
negotiations.

(3)

A list of all prior settlement discussions, if any, including the date, the parties
involved, and the approximate duration of such discussions.

(4)

A statement confirming that the parties have discussed the use of alternate dispute
resolution mechanisms and indicating whether the parties believe that (a) a
settlement conference before a Magistrate Judge; (b) participation in the District’s
Mediation Program; and/or (c) retention of a privately retained mediator would be
appropriate and, if so, when.

(5)

Whether there is anything the Court can do to facilitate settlement (including but
not limited to referring the matter for a settlement conference before a Magistrate
Judge or to the District’s Mediation Program).

(6)

To the extent that Defendant has not answered or appeared, whether Plaintiff
intends to move for default judgment (and, if so, when Plaintiff would be
prepared to do so) and/or whether any party intends to move for an extension of
Defendant’s deadline to answer.

(7)

Whether any party believes that the Court should hold a conference to address any
of the foregoing and, if so, when.

If any party believes that discovery is necessary or that an initial pretrial conference
should be held, the parties shall, by the same date and in lieu of the aforementioned letter, file
on ECF (1) a joint letter in accordance with Paragraph 2.B of the Court’s Individual Rules and
Practices and as described below; and (2) a proposed Civil Case Management Plan and
Scheduling Order attached as an exhibit to the joint letter. The parties shall use this Court’s form
Proposed Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order, which is also available at
https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman. After reviewing the parties’ submissions,
the Court will decide if an initial pretrial conference is necessary.
The parties’ joint letter shall not exceed five (5) pages and shall provide the following
information in separate paragraphs:
(1)

A brief statement of the nature of the action and the principal defenses thereto;

(2)

A brief explanation of why jurisdiction and venue lie in this Court;

(3)

A statement of all existing deadlines, due dates, and/or cut-off dates;

(4)

A brief description of any outstanding motions;

(5)

A brief description of any discovery that has already taken place and of any
discovery that is necessary for the parties to engage in meaningful settlement
negotiations;

(6)

A list of all prior settlement discussions, including the date, the parties involved,
and the approximate duration of such discussions, if any;

(7)

A statement confirming that the parties have discussed the use of alternate dispute
resolution mechanisms and indicating whether the parties believe that (a) a
settlement conference before a Magistrate Judge; (b) participation in the District’s
Mediation Program; and/or (c) retention of a privately retained mediator would be
appropriate and, if so, when in the case (e.g., within the next sixty days; after the

2