Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 22, 2025

GateGuard, Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc.

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:21-cv-09321
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In GateGuard v. Amazon.com, Magistrate Judge Figueredo scheduled an ex parte conference on counsel’s opposed withdrawal motion.

Who this affects

GateGuard, Inc., its counsel, and the GateGuard representative directed to attend the conference.

What happened

GateGuard, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. concerns a motion by GateGuard’s counsel to withdraw from representing the company. The filing said GateGuard opposed the motion.

The court scheduled a private conference, without the other side present, to address the withdrawal request. A GateGuard representative who can explain the company’s opposition must attend, and GateGuard’s counsel must also attend.

Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo said the private format may be necessary because the dispute could involve attorney-client privileged information. The order scheduled the conference for August 14, 2025, but did not decide whether counsel may withdraw.

The detailed version

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

Case
GateGuard, Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-09321
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
July 22, 2025

Background

On June 24, 2025, GateGuard’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw from representing GateGuard, Inc. The filing indicated that GateGuard opposed the motion.

Order

The court scheduled an ex parte conference—meaning a conference without the other side present—for Thursday, August 14, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 17-A at 500 Pearl Street in New York. The court directed a GateGuard representative who can address the company’s opposition to appear. GateGuard’s counsel was also directed to appear.

Reason for the Conference Format

The court explained that the dispute could require disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege. It cited decisions stating that withdrawal motions may be filed under seal when necessary to protect the attorney-client relationship and that private proceedings or review of documents by the judge are routine in disputes involving that privilege.

Disposition

Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo scheduled the conference and issued appearance directives. The order did not grant or deny the motion to withdraw.

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.