The Granger Collection, LTD. v. Pacific Press Service et al
Filing
28
ORDER: Plaintiff has not made a third request to adjourn the conference, currently scheduled for November 16, 2023, at 10:30 a.m. (E.T.). Nonetheless, whereas Defendants have still not appeared, the conference is hereby ADJOURNED to December 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. (E.T.). The parties shall dial 646-453-4442, enter the meeting code 54666466, and press pound (#). As further set forth in this Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Dale E. Ho on 11/15/2023) ( Initial Conference set for 12/21/2023 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale E. Ho.) (ks)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
THE GRANGER COLLECTION, LTD,
Plaintiff(s),
23-CV-3647 (DEH)
v.
PACIFIC PRESS SERVICE, et al.,
ORDER
Defendant(s).
DALE E. HO, United States District Judge:
On August 30, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s first request to adjourn the initial
pretrial conference, pending the Court’s decision on Plaintiff’s Motion to Authorize Alternative
Service. ECF No. 14. On October 19, 2023, the Court granted such authorization. ECF No. 20.
On October 25, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s second request to adjourn the initial
pretrial conference, pending Plaintiff’s issuance of summons and alternative service on
Defendants. ECF No. 26.
Plaintiff has not made a third request to adjourn the conference, currently scheduled for
November 16, 2023, at 10:30 a.m. (E.T.). Nonetheless, whereas Defendants have still not
appeared, the conference is hereby ADJOURNED to December 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. (E.T.).
The parties shall dial 646-453-4442, enter the meeting code 54666466, and press pound (#).
Plaintiff is ORDERED to file on ECF a letter updating the Court on the status of this case
by November 22, 2023. The letter shall address (1) whether this case has settled or otherwise
been terminated, (2) whether there have been any communications with the Defendant(s)
(including a description of contact efforts that have been made to date), and (3) whether Plaintiff
intends to move for default judgment or to voluntarily dismiss this case.
By December 14, 2023, the parties are hereby ORDERED to file on ECF a joint letter,
described below, updating the Court on the status of the case. Parties shall attach the Civil Case
Management Plan and Scheduling Order, available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-dale-eho, to the joint letter. The joint letter shall provide the following information, as relevant, in
separate paragraphs:
1.
Names of counsel and current contact information, if different from the
information currently reflected on the docket;
2.
A brief statement of the nature of the case and/or the principal defenses thereto;
3.
A brief explanation of why jurisdiction and venue lie in this Court. In any action
in which subject matter jurisdiction is founded on diversity of citizenship
pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 1332, the letter must explain the
basis for the parties’ belief that diversity of citizenship exists. Where any party is
a corporation, the letter shall state both the place of incorporation and the
principal place of business. In cases where any party is a partnership, limited
partnership, limited liability company, or trust, the letter shall state the
citizenship of each of the entity’s members, shareholders, partners, and/or
trustees;
4.
A statement of all existing deadlines, due dates, and/or cut-off dates;
5.
A statement of any previously-scheduled conference dates with the Court that
have not yet occurred and the matters that were to be discussed;
6.
A brief description of any outstanding motions, including the date of the motion
and the nature of the relief sought;
7.
A statement and description of any pending appeals;
2
8.
A detailed statement of all discovery undertaken to date, including how many
depositions each party has taken and what, if any, discovery remains that is
essential for the parties to engage in meaningful settlement negotiations;
9.
A brief description of the status of prior settlement discussions, without
disclosing exact offers and demands;
10.
A statement of whether 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
60 days, after the deposition of plaintiff is completed, after the close of fact
discovery, etc.) the use of such a mechanism would be appropriate;
11.
An estimate of the length of trial; and
12.
Any other information that the parties believe may assist the Court in advancing
the case to settlement or trial, including, but not limited to, a description of any
dispositive or novel issue raised by the case.
If this case has been settled or otherwise terminated, counsel are not required to submit
such letter or to appear, provided that a stipulation of discontinuance, voluntary dismissal, or
other proof of termination is filed on the docket prior to the joint letter submission deadline,
using the appropriate ECF Filing Event. See SDNY ECF Rules & Instructions §§ 13.17-13.19,
available at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/ecf_filing.php. The parties are advised that requests for
extensions or adjournment may be made only by letter-motion filed on ECF, and must be
received at least two business days before the deadline or scheduled appearance, absent
compelling circumstances. The written submission must state (1) the original date(s) set for the
3
appearance or deadline(s) and the new date(s) requested; (2) the reason(s) for the request; (3) the
number of previous requests for adjournment or extension; (4) whether these previous requests
were granted or denied; and (5) whether opposing counsel consents, and, if not, the reasons given
by opposing counsel for refusing to consent.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 15, 2023
New York, New York
DALE E. HO
United States District Judge
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?