Recoop LLC v. Outliers Inc. d/b/a Thesis Nootropics Inc.

Background

The court reported receiving several direct communications to chambers, including communications concerning settlement. Many came from Anastasia Alt, whom the opinion identifies as proceeding without a lawyer. The court stated that these communications were improper.

Court’s directions

The court stated that it would hear the parties at scheduled conferences or through motions properly made and filed on the docket under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Southern District of New York’s Local Rules, and the judge’s individual practices. The court said it would disregard all other communications. Motions and letter-motions had to be submitted through the court’s electronic filing system. Communications solely between the parties or their lawyers, or otherwise not addressed to the court, could not be filed or sent to the court except as exhibits to a properly filed document.

The court specifically directed Alt to follow the provisions governing communications by parties representing themselves. It also explained that Alt could represent herself in her individual capacity as a counterclaim and third-party defendant, but could not represent Recoop. The court stated that it had not granted permission for Recoop’s counsel to withdraw and that, unless and until it did so, only Bochner PLLC could communicate with the court or with Outliers, its counsel, or its representatives on Recoop’s behalf.

Disposition and effect

This order set procedures for communications and representation; it did not decide the underlying claims or counterclaims. Judge Lewis J. Liman entered the order on November 20, 2024.