Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 21, 2025

Greenhouse v. Website Symmetry

Judge
Ho
Docket
1:23-cv-09754
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Greenhouse v. Website Symmetry, Judge Ho ordered defendants to oppose a pending default-judgment motion and explain why it should not be granted.

Who this affects

Greenhouse, Blitz Design, Inc., 360 Art Studio, Inc., and the plaintiffs responsible for serving the motion and order.

What happened

In Greenhouse v. Website Symmetry, Greenhouse asked for a default judgment against Blitz Design, Inc. and 360 Art Studio, Inc. A default judgment is a judgment requested when a party has not properly defended the case.

The court ordered the defendants to file any opposition by March 3, 2025, and to appear by telephone on March 5, 2025, to explain why the requested judgment should not be entered. The court also ordered the plaintiffs to serve the motion, supporting papers, and this order by overnight courier and file proof of service.

Judge Dale E. Ho did not grant or deny the default-judgment motion in this order. He warned that corporations may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel and ordered the defendants to respond and appear.

The detailed version

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

Case
Greenhouse v. Website Symmetry · No. 1:23-cv-09754
Judge
Ho
Date
Feb. 21, 2025

Background

On February 14, 2025, Greenhouse filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) and Local Civil Rule 55.2(b) seeking a default judgment against Blitz Design, Inc. and 360 Art Studio, Inc. The order does not decide whether the defendants are liable or whether the motion should ultimately be granted.

Court’s Orders

The court ordered the defendants to file any opposition to the motion by March 3, 2025. It also ordered them to appear and show cause—that is, explain why the court should not grant the requested default judgment—at a telephone conference on March 5, 2025, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time.

The court cautioned that corporate entities may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel. It further ordered the plaintiffs to serve the defendants by overnight courier with the motion, all supporting papers, and a copy of the order within three business days after filing each document. The plaintiffs must file proof of each service within two business days after service.

Disposition and Effect

This is a procedural order setting response, appearance, and service requirements. The court neither granted nor denied the motion for default judgment. The order states that the conference would be held remotely by telephone unless the court ordered otherwise.

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.