Bernstein v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
- Clarke
- 1:24-cv-03552
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bernstein v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, Judge Clarke granted a request to pause discovery deadlines while Chase’s reconsideration motion remains pending.
The parties subject to the referenced Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order, whose discovery deadlines are paused pending resolution of the motion for reconsideration.
What happened
In Bernstein v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, the court had previously dismissed all claims except one claim under New York General Business Law § 349. Chase’s motion asking the court to reconsider that decision remained pending.
The parties jointly asked the court to pause the discovery deadlines while it decided the reconsideration motion. They had already exchanged initial document requests, interrogatories, and responses, and said continuing discovery could waste resources if the pending motion ended the case.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke granted the request. The court adjourned the discovery deadlines indefinitely while the motion for reconsideration is pending; the order did not decide that motion.
The detailed version
- Bernstein v. JPMorgan Chase Bank · No. 1:24-cv-03552
- Clarke
- Oct. 9, 2025
Background
The opinion is an order on a joint request to pause discovery deadlines. The court stated that, on March 28, 2025, it had granted in part JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s and Bank of America, N.A.’s motions to dismiss. The court dismissed all causes of action except one claim under New York General Business Law § 349. Chase then filed a motion for reconsideration, which was fully briefed and remained pending.
The parties had served initial document requests and interrogatories, along with responses and objections. They jointly asked the court to adjourn the deadlines in the Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order indefinitely while the court decided the reconsideration motion. The request stated that granting reconsideration could dispose of the action and that continuing discovery could waste the parties’ and the court’s resources.
Ruling
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke granted the application. The court ordered that the discovery deadlines in the parties’ Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order were adjourned indefinitely pending the court’s decision on the motion for reconsideration. The order did not rule on the reconsideration motion itself.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.