Ameriway Corporation v. Chen
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:19-cv-09407
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ameriway Corporation v. Chen, Magistrate Judge Figueredo ordered discovery steps, a status letter, and any needed sealing motion.
Ameriway Corporation, May Yan Chen, and the other defendants were affected by the discovery deadlines, meet-and-confer requirement, status-letter requirement, and sealing-motion instructions.
What happened
In Ameriway Corporation v. Chen, the court addressed outstanding discovery issues between Ameriway Corporation and the defendants, including May Yan Chen.
The parties were ordered to meet and discuss the listed discovery disputes, finish searching for Terms & Conditions by August 1, 2022, and file a joint update about discovery by August 5, 2022. The court also said that any request to seal documents must be made through a proper motion explaining why sealing is justified.
Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo directed these steps and instructed the Clerk of Court to close three listed motions. The order did not decide the parties’ underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Ameriway Corporation v. Chen · No. 1:19-cv-09407
- Vernon Broderick
- June 17, 2022
Background
Ameriway Corporation sued May Yan Chen and other defendants. The order concerned discovery disputes identified in letters filed at ECF Nos. 114-115, 118-119, 121, 126, 132, 138, and 142.
Court’s Directions
The court directed the parties to meet and confer—that is, to discuss together—about the outstanding discovery disputes. It also ordered them to complete the search for Terms & Conditions discussed during conferences on May 23 and June 16, 2022, no later than August 1, 2022. The parties were required to submit a joint status letter updating the court on discovery no later than August 5, 2022.
The court further directed that, if the parties wanted particular documents placed under seal, they must file a proper sealing motion explaining how the standard from Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006), was satisfied. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motions at ECF Nos. 114, 115, and 131.
Disposition and Significance
This was a discovery-management and sealing-related order. It did not resolve the underlying claims or defenses. The court entered the directions above and ordered the three listed motions closed. The opinion is signed by United States Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.