Aamer v. Eden Gallery Group Ltd.
- Garnett
- 1:24-cv-07678
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Aamer v. Eden Gallery Group Ltd., Judge Garnett granted a joint request to postpone the conference and extend plaintiffs’ amendment deadline.
The plaintiffs received more time to amend their complaint, and all parties’ initial pretrial conference and related submission deadline were postponed.
What happened
In Aamer v. Eden Gallery Group Ltd., the defendants had asked to dismiss the complaint, including on jurisdictional grounds. The parties jointly asked to postpone the initial conference and related filing deadline while the plaintiffs considered amending their complaint.
The court granted the request. It postponed the initial pretrial conference and the parties’ accompanying joint submissions without setting a new date, and extended the plaintiffs’ deadline to amend their complaint to February 7, 2025.
Judge Margaret M. Garnett also ordered the parties to meet after the amended complaint was filed and submit a status update by February 14, 2025 proposing a schedule for any new dismissal motion or for the defendants’ answer. The order did not decide the pending jurisdictional or dismissal issues.
The detailed version
- Aamer v. Eden Gallery Group Ltd. · No. 1:24-cv-07678
- Garnett
- Jan. 13, 2025
Background
Defendants Eden Gallery Group Ltd., Cathia Klimovsky, Guy Martinovsky, Gal Yosef, and Cetra Art Corporation moved to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint, raising, among other arguments, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The parties jointly requested that the court postpone the January 23, 2025 initial pretrial conference and the January 16, 2025 deadline for their pre-conference submissions. They also requested an extension of the plaintiffs’ deadline to amend the complaint from January 21, 2025 to February 7, 2025.
The parties explained that the plaintiffs intended to amend their complaint in response to the motion to dismiss and needed additional time to consider arguments concerning subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. The request also sought to avoid setting a schedule for the rest of the case before the court addressed jurisdiction.
Ruling
The court granted the request. It adjourned the initial pretrial conference and the accompanying deadline for the parties’ joint submissions without setting a new date. It also extended the plaintiffs’ deadline to amend the complaint to February 7, 2025.
After the amended complaint is filed, the parties must meet and confer and submit a status update to the court by February 14, 2025. The update must propose a briefing schedule for any motion to dismiss or, alternatively, a date by which the defendants must answer the amended complaint.
The order did not decide whether the court has subject-matter or personal jurisdiction, and it did not decide the pending motion to dismiss.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.