Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 8, 2024

Competello v. Beauty Leaf Incorporated

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:24-cv-04970
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Competello v. Beauty Leaf, Judge Rochon ordered settlement discussions and a joint status letter without deciding the case’s merits.

Who this affects

Susan Competello and Beauty Leaf Incorporated, doing business as Nikua Skin, must comply with the settlement-discussion and joint-letter requirements.

What happened

In Competello v. Beauty Leaf Incorporated, the court ordered Susan Competello and Beauty Leaf Incorporated, doing business as Nikua Skin, to try to settle the case.

Within 30 days after the summons and complaint are served, the parties must meet for at least one hour and discuss settlement, including whether Competello has met the threshold requirement of standing. If they cannot settle, they must also discuss whether court-connected mediation or a settlement conference before a magistrate judge would be productive.

Within 15 more days, the parties must send a joint letter stating whether they settled. If not, they must request mediation or a magistrate-judge settlement conference and state their preference, or request an initial status conference. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon did not decide standing or the underlying claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Competello v. Beauty Leaf Incorporated · No. 1:24-cv-04970
Judge
Rochon
Date
July 8, 2024

Order

The court ordered the parties to make a good-faith effort to settle the action. Within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint, Susan Competello and Beauty Leaf Incorporated, doing business as Nikua Skin, must meet and confer for at least one hour.

The parties must discuss whether the plaintiff has satisfied the threshold requirement of standing, meaning the requirement that she be entitled to bring the case in federal court. The order cites Calcano v. Swarovski N. Am. Ltd. and Harty v. W. Point Realty, Inc. The parties must also discuss whether additional settlement discussions through the district’s court-annexed mediation program or before a magistrate judge would be productive if they cannot settle on their own.

Further Filing

Within 15 additional days—45 days after service of the summons and complaint—the parties must submit a joint letter stating whether they settled. If they did not settle, the letter must request either referral to mediation or to a magistrate judge for a settlement conference, with a preference between those options, or an initial status conference.

Disposition

This order directs settlement and case-management steps. It does not decide standing, the merits of the claims, or any motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.