Liz v. Jomashop, Inc.
- Garnett
- 1:24-cv-04921
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Liz v. Jomashop, Judge Garnett ordered settlement talks, a joint status letter, and a temporary stay of Jomashop’s response deadline.
Pedro Liz, Jomashop, Inc., and their counsel are affected by the required settlement meeting, joint letter, notice obligations, and stayed response deadline.
What happened
Pedro Liz v. Jomashop, Inc. is a lawsuit brought by Liz individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated people. The order set early case-management steps rather than resolving the dispute.
Within 30 days after Jomashop is served with the summons and complaint, the parties must meet for at least one hour and make a good-faith effort to settle. They must discuss whether Liz meets the legal requirement of standing and whether court-sponsored mediation or a settlement conference with a magistrate judge would be useful.
Within 15 more days, the parties must file a joint letter reporting whether they settled and, if not, requesting mediation, a magistrate-judge settlement conference, or an initial status conference. The letter must also state whether Jomashop plans to answer or ask the court to dismiss the complaint. Judge Margaret M. Garnett stayed Jomashop’s deadline to respond until the letter is filed.
The detailed version
- Liz v. Jomashop, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-04921
- Garnett
- July 1, 2024
Order and Case Management
The court ordered the parties to meet and confer within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint on Jomashop. The meeting must last at least one hour and must be a good-faith effort to settle the action.
The parties must consider whether Pedro Liz has satisfied the threshold requirement of standing. Standing is the legal requirement that a plaintiff be entitled to bring the case. The parties must also discuss whether additional settlement discussions through the court’s mediation program or before a magistrate judge would be productive if they cannot settle on their own.
Joint Letter and Response Deadline
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 a settlement conference before a magistrate judge, while stating their preference, or an initial status conference.
The joint letter must also state whether Jomashop intends to answer the complaint or move to dismiss it. If Jomashop intends to move to dismiss, the letter must briefly state the basis for the anticipated motion in no more than one paragraph. The opinion does not decide any such motion.
The deadline for Jomashop to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint is stayed until the joint letter is submitted. After the letter is filed, the court will set either a deadline for Jomashop’s answer or a briefing schedule for a motion to dismiss.
Notice to Counsel
Counsel who had appeared when the order was issued must promptly serve the order and Judge Garnett’s Individual Rules and Practices on counsel for parties who had not appeared. If the identity of such counsel is unknown, the materials must be sent directly to that party. Counsel must file proof of this notice with the court.
Disposition
This is a procedural case-management order. It orders settlement-related discussions, sets reporting requirements, and stays the response deadline; it does not state a ruling on the merits of Liz’s claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.