Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 13, 2024

Verificient Technologies, Inc. v. Dutta

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:24-cv-09487
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ArbitrationCivil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Verificient Technologies v. Dutta, Judge Woods ordered briefing and supporting materials for a petition to confirm an arbitration award.

Who this affects

Verificient Technologies, Inc. and Apratim Dutta

What happened

Verificient Technologies, Inc. filed a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award against Apratim Dutta. The order did not decide whether the award should be confirmed.

The court ordered Verificient to file a statement required by a local rule and any additional supporting materials by January 10, 2025. Dutta’s opposition was due February 14, 2025, and Verificient’s reply, if any, was due February 28, 2025. Verificient also had to serve the petition and supporting materials on Dutta and file proof of service.

Judge Gregory H. Woods issued the December 13, 2024 order. Because petitions to confirm arbitration awards are handled similarly to requests for summary judgment, the court set deadlines for evidence and briefing before addressing the petition.

The detailed version

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

Case
Verificient Technologies, Inc. v. Dutta · No. 1:24-cv-09487
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Dec. 13, 2024

Background

On December 12, 2024, Verificient Technologies, Inc. filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award against Apratim Dutta. The court explained that proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are treated similarly to a motion for summary judgment, which is a request for judgment based on the submitted evidence when there is no genuine dispute requiring a trial.

Court’s Order

The court ordered Verificient to file and serve a statement required by Local Civil Rule 56.1 and any additional materials supporting the petition by January 10, 2025. Those materials could include affidavits or declarations stating that the petition’s exhibits are true and correct copies of what they claim to be.

Dutta’s opposition was due February 14, 2025. Verificient’s reply, if any, was due February 28, 2025.

The court also directed Verificient to serve the petition and supporting materials on Dutta by January 17, 2025, and to file an affidavit confirming service by January 21, 2025.

Disposition

Judge Gregory H. Woods issued a scheduling and briefing order. The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied the petition, and it does not decide whether the arbitration award should be confirmed.

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.