Skanska USA Building Inc. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Filing 89

ORDER A pre-motion conference was held on November 25, 2024, concerning Defendant Regenerons anticipated motion to strike paragraphs 195-211 and 304-305 in the First Amended Complaint (the Disputed Allegations) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Pr ocedure 12(f). Counsel for all parties appeared. The Court construed Defendant Regenerons pre-motion letter (Doc. 61) as its motion to strike, Plaintiffs response letter (Doc. 60) as its opposition, and considering the parties arguments made in the ir joint letter (Doc. 75) and at the conference, granted the motion to strike. (See Transcript); see In re Best Payphones, Inc., 450 F. Appx 8, 15 (2d Cir. 2011) (finding the Court did not abuse its discretion in construing the parties letter-motions as the motions themselves, and ruling on them). Plaintiff shall, by December 2, 2024, file a Second Amended Complaint which only eliminates the Disputed Allegations. Defendants Regeneron and Shawns Lawns Inc. shall, by December 9, 2024, each fil e an amended answer which only eliminates their responses to the Disputed Allegations. SO ORDERED. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. answer due 12/9/2024; Shawn's Lawns Inc. answer due 12/9/2024.(Amended Pleadings due by 12/2/2024.) (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 11/25/2024) (ar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SKANSKA USA BUILDING INC.,
Plaintiff,
-against-

ORDER
23-CV-08418(PMH)

REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
and SHAWN’S LAWNS INC.,
Defendants.
PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge:
A pre-motion conference was held on November 25, 2024, concerning Defendant
Regeneron’s anticipated motion to strike paragraphs 195-211 and 304-305 in the First Amended
Complaint (the “Disputed Allegations”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f). Counsel
for all parties appeared. The Court construed Defendant Regeneron’s pre-motion letter (Doc. 61)
as its motion to strike, Plaintiff’s response letter (Doc. 60) as its opposition, and considering the
parties’ arguments made in their joint letter (Doc. 75) and at the conference, granted the motion to
strike. (See Transcript); see In re Best Payphones, Inc., 450 F. App’x 8, 15 (2d Cir. 2011) (finding
the Court did not abuse its discretion in construing the parties’ letter-motions as the motions
themselves, and ruling on them). Plaintiff shall, by December 2, 2024, file a Second Amended
Complaint which only eliminates the Disputed Allegations. Defendants Regeneron and Shawn’s
Lawns Inc. shall, by December 9, 2024, each file an amended answer which only eliminates their
responses to the Disputed Allegations.
Dated: White Plains, New York
November 25, 2024

SO ORDERED:
____________________________
Philip M. Halpern
United States District Judge