Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 23, 2025

Baring Industries, Inc. v. Rosen

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:24-cv-05606
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Baring Industries v. Rosen, Judge Torres granted Baring Industries leave to move to strike the defendants’ affirmative defenses and set briefing deadlines.

Who this affects

Baring Industries, Inc., Jared Rosen, and Michael J. Noonan; the order allows Baring Industries to file a motion and sets deadlines but does not decide the affirmative defenses.

What happened

Baring Industries, Inc. asked for permission to file a motion challenging Jared Rosen’s and Michael J. Noonan’s affirmative defenses.

The court explained that motions to strike are generally disfavored and usually require a strong reason. It nevertheless allowed Baring Industries to file the motion if it still wanted to do so.

Judge Analisa Torres granted the request for permission and set deadlines for the motion, the defendants’ response, and any reply. The court did not decide the motion to strike itself.

The detailed version

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

Case
Baring Industries, Inc. v. Rosen · No. 1:24-cv-05606
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
June 23, 2025

Background

The Court reviewed letters from the parties dated June 12 and June 19, 2025. Baring Industries sought permission to file a motion to strike Jared Rosen’s and Michael J. Noonan’s affirmative defenses. A motion to strike asks the court to remove material from a pleading.

Court’s Analysis

The Court advised Baring Industries that motions to strike are generally disfavored and are granted only for a strong reason. The Court also cited authority stating that a defense based on failure to state a claim generally cannot be challenged through a motion to strike and that defendants may receive a more flexible plausibility standard when the supporting facts are not readily available to them.

Despite those points, the Court allowed Baring Industries to file the proposed motion if it still wished to do so. The Court did not rule on the merits of any motion to strike or decide whether any affirmative defense should be removed.

Disposition

The Court granted Baring Industries’ request for leave to file a motion to strike the defendants’ affirmative defenses. It ordered Baring Industries to file the motion by July 11, 2025; the defendants to respond by July 25, 2025; and Baring Industries to file any reply by August 1, 2025. Judge Analisa Torres signed the order.

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.