Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 7, 2025

Sacchi v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.

Full caption

John Sacchi, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A., et al.

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:25-cv-07632
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sacchi v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, Judge Furman reassigned the case and ordered counsel to attend a December 16, 2025 conference.

Who this affects

Counsel for all parties in John Sacchi’s case, as well as the parties who must provide the required case-status information and attend the conference through counsel.

What happened

John Sacchi v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al. was reassigned to the court handling the notice. The opinion says that existing orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect unless changed, while any currently scheduled conference or oral argument before the court is adjourned pending further order.

Counsel for all parties must attend a remote telephone conference on December 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. The parties must also file a joint letter addressing the case’s status, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, estimated trial length, and other information helpful to moving the case toward settlement or trial.

Judge Jesse M. Furman issued the order. The notice schedules case-management steps and does not decide the claims, defenses, or merits of the dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sacchi v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. · No. 1:25-cv-07632
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Nov. 7, 2025

Background

The case was reassigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. The order states that, unless the court orders otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect despite the reassignment. Any conference or oral argument already scheduled before the court is adjourned pending further order.

Conference and joint letter

The order requires counsel for all parties to appear remotely by telephone for a court conference on December 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Unless the court grants permission based on a letter-motion filed before the conference, each pretrial conference must be attended by the attorney who will serve as principal trial counsel.

By Thursday of the week before the conference, the parties must file a joint letter of no more than five pages. The letter must separately address counsel’s contact information; the nature of the case and principal defenses; the basis for jurisdiction and venue; existing deadlines; previously scheduled conferences; outstanding motions; pending appeals; discovery completed and still needed for meaningful settlement discussions; prior settlement discussions; possible alternative dispute resolution; estimated trial length; and other information that may help advance the case toward settlement or trial. The order gives additional instructions about describing citizenship when jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship.

Other instructions and effect

If the case has been settled or otherwise terminated, counsel do not have to file the joint letter or appear if proof of termination is filed on the docket before the deadline. Requests to extend a deadline or adjourn the conference must be made by an electronic letter-motion received at least 48 hours before the relevant deadline or conference and must include the information specified in the order.

This is a case-management order. It schedules a conference and requires status information; it does not resolve the parties’ claims or defenses.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.