Sultan v. Plume, Inc. et al

Filing 29

ORDER denying as moot 23 Letter Motion for Leave to File Document; granting 27 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; granting 27 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. The Court will grant a two week extension, un til June 14, 2024. No further extensions will be granted. The parties should file their dispositive motions no later than July 8, 2024. Additionally, Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend is DENIED as moot based on Plaintiff's letter at Dkt. 28. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at Dkts. 23 and 27. SO ORDERED. ( Discovery due by 6/14/2024., Motions due by 7/8/2024.) (Signed by Judge Arun Subramanian on 6/3/2024) (vfr)

DAVID J. GRECH
[e-mail]
The Court will grant a two week extension, until June 14, 2024. No further extensions will be granted. The
parties should file their dispositive motions no later than July 8, 2024. Additionally, Plaintiff's motion for leave
to amend is DENIED as moot based on Plaintiff's letter at Dkt. 28.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at Dkts. 23 and 27.
SO ORDERED.

Arun Subramanian, U.S.D.J.
Date: June 3, 2024

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1 BATTERY PARK PLAZA
28TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10004
[phone]
WWW.GRSM.COM

May 31, 2024

VIA ECF
The Honorable Arun Subramanian U.S.D.J.
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007
Re:

Sultan v. Plume Inc. et al.
Case No.: 1:23-cv-08830-AS

Dear Judge Subramanian,
We represent Defendants in this case. We write concerning the Court’s Order, dated May
9, 2024 (ECF No. 21), specifically the Court’s “grant[ing of] a short extension of time to complete
discovery until May 31, 2024” and directing that dispositive motions will be due on or before June
15, 2024. We also write concerning the Court’s Order, dated May 29, 2024 (ECF No. 24),
addressing Plaintiff’s letter motion for leave to file a second amended complaint and setting a
briefing schedule for the parties to conclude by June 11, 2024.
Given, inter alia, the briefing schedule the Court has set for Plaintiff’s letter motion for
leave to file a second amended complaint, which letter motion was filed on May 28, 2024,
Defendants respectfully request that the deadline to complete discovery be extended, at least until
a determination is made on the motion to amend the complaint. Absent that requested relief,
discovery will have closed while the operative pleading remains at issue. Further, Defendants
respectfully request that the deadline for dispositive motions be similarly extended. Similarly,
absent this requested relief, the parties would have to turn to dispositive motions, again while the
operative pleading might still be at issue. Without so revising these deadlines and if Plaintiff were
granted leave to further amend his complaint, dispositive motions on Plaintiff’s resulting second
amended complaint would be due before Defendants’ answer to it.
Further supporting these instant requests is the fact that Plaintiff served second requests for
admission upon Defendants on May 28, 2024. Earlier today, Defendants supplemented their
document production in response to Plaintiff’s existing requests. Defendants served requests for
production upon Plaintiff based upon his testimony at his deposition on May 21, 2024. Defendants
also served notices of deposition upon two non-party witnesses for June 7, 2024 and June 14, 2024
respectively. Plaintiff had originally sought to depose one of these non-party witnesses but
ultimately withdrew that request. As a result, however, of the testimony elicited during the
depositions of the parties, which were conducted on May 13, 15, 21, and 28, Defendants have
concluded that these two non-party witnesses likely have information vital to this case.

Hon. Arun Subramanian U.S.D.J.
U.S. District Court, S.D.N.Y.
May 31, 2024
Page 2 of 2
As might be apparent to the Court, given the amount and extent of recent activity in this
litigation, counsel have been in almost daily communications, including today. This morning, our
office informed Plaintiff’s counsel of our intended instant requests and sought their position on
them. As of the time of this submission, we have not received a response.
Given these circumstances, which Defendants respectfully submit constitute good cause,
Defendants respectfully request that the deadlines for the completion discovery and for dispositive
motions be extended until a determination is made on Plaintiff’s pending motion for leave to file
a second amended complaint. In the alternative, Defendants request a two-week extension of these
deadlines.
We greatly appreciate the Court’s attention to this matter and consideration of this request
to allow the parties to complete discovery under these circumstances.
Respectfully submitted,
GORDON REES
SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
/s/ David J. Grech
David J. Grech
Attorneys for Defendants

To:

All attorneys of record (via ECF)