McCaffrey v. Gatekeeper USA, Inc
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:14-cv-00493-VSB
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 49
In McCaffrey v. Gatekeeper, Judge Broderick set response and reply deadlines for McCaffrey’s summary-judgment motion and directed service by mail.
The order sets deadlines for the defendants and Timothy Andrew McCaffrey, and directs the clerk to mail the order and attachments to them.
What happened
McCaffrey v. Gatekeeper USA, Inc. concerns Timothy Andrew McCaffrey’s motion for summary judgment. The opinion says McCaffrey represented himself and that the motion papers were filed against defendants in the case.
The court held a telephone conference on December 30, 2019, to discuss how McCaffrey’s motion papers would be served. The opinion does not decide whether McCaffrey or the defendants were legally right on the claims or whether summary judgment should be granted.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered that any opposition from the defendants was due February 9, 2020, and that any reply from McCaffrey was due March 2, 2020. Judge Broderick also ruled that attaching the motion papers to the order would be sufficient service and directed the clerk to mail the order and attachments to the pro se plaintiff and defendants.
The detailed version
- McCaffrey v. Gatekeeper USA, Inc · No. 1:14-cv-00493-VSB
- Vernon Broderick
- Dec. 31, 2019
Nature of the Order
This is a scheduling and service order, not a decision on the merits of the plaintiff’s summary-judgment motion. The order addresses the timing and method for responding to the motion.
Background
Timothy Andrew McCaffrey filed a motion for summary judgment in a case involving Gatekeeper USA, Inc., Asgard International, Inc., Ares Ventures Inc., A. John Leontakianakos, and John Seetoo. The submitted motion papers assert securities-fraud, misrepresentation, and related claims, but those assertions are the plaintiff’s positions in the motion materials and were not decided by this order. The order states that McCaffrey was representing himself.
Court’s Action
After holding a telephone conference with the parties on December 30, 2019, Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered that the defendants’ opposition, if any, to McCaffrey’s summary-judgment motion was due February 9, 2020. McCaffrey’s reply, if any, was due March 2, 2020.
Judge Broderick attached a copy of McCaffrey’s summary-judgment papers to the order and ruled that the attachment would be sufficient service on the defendants. The clerk was directed to mail the order and attachments to the pro se plaintiff and the defendants.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The opinion does not state that the summary-judgment motion was granted, denied, or otherwise decided. It also does not determine liability, damages, sanctions, or the merits of the underlying claims.
Read the full 49-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.