Bass v. Pershing

Background

The court had postponed the initial pretrial conference in the action. Robert C. Bass, who represented himself, asked for relief from that order under Rule 60(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. His request concerned the postponement of the conference, which had been scheduled for July 25, 2025, and a related joint letter submission.

Bass’s Arguments

Bass argued that CGMI had initiated the request for the postponement. He contended that the court should therefore have applied the provision in its individual practices for cases involving licensed legal counsel, which he said would have allowed no more than six weeks. He also argued that the court should not have applied the provision allowing a longer period for self-represented litigants, even though he had filed an amended complaint on June 24, 2025.

Bass asserted that the application of the self-represented-litigant rules created a conflict or amounted to a misapplication of the court’s practices. He further argued that the longer postponement could prejudice him by increasing the possibility of fraud or collusion and causing evidence to be lost.

Court’s Reasoning

The court stated that its decision to postpone the initial pretrial conference was not based on the requirements of the judge’s individual practices. Instead, the court relied on its inherent authority to manage its docket to promote the efficient and expedient resolution of cases. The court determined that judicial economy favored postponing the conference so it could first consider the parties’ briefs concerning the defendants’ forthcoming motions to dismiss.

Disposition

The application for relief from the prior order was DENIED. The opinion did not decide the forthcoming motions to dismiss or the underlying claims. The ruling concerned management of the court’s schedule.