Pacelli v. Augustus Intelligence, Inc.
- Lewis Liman
- 1:20-cv-01011
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Pacelli v. Augustus Intelligence, Judge Liman allowed plaintiffs to file a limited sur-reply on defendant’s motion to compel arbitration.
The plaintiffs and Augustus Intelligence, Inc.; the plaintiffs were allowed to submit a limited sur-reply concerning the motion to compel arbitration.
What happened
Pacelli v. Augustus Intelligence concerns defendant’s fully submitted motion to compel arbitration.
The court allowed the plaintiffs to respond to arguments in the final two paragraphs of defendant’s reply brief, but only about whether some complaint claims were outside the arbitration agreement.
Judge Liman set a two-page limit and a February 26, 2020, deadline; he did not decide the motion to compel arbitration in this order.
The detailed version
- Pacelli v. Augustus Intelligence, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-01011
- Lewis Liman
- Feb. 24, 2020
Background The court had received a fully submitted motion to compel arbitration from Augustus Intelligence, Inc. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or provide the terms of the arbitration agreement.
Order Although sur-replies—additional responses to a reply brief—are not routinely ordered or granted, the court exercised its discretion to permit the plaintiffs to respond to arguments in the final two paragraphs of the defendant’s reply memorandum. Those arguments concerned the plaintiffs’ position that some claims in their complaint were not subject to the arbitration agreement.
The court permitted the plaintiffs to submit a sur-reply letter of no more than two pages by Wednesday, February 26, 2020, at 5:00 p.m. The letter could not address other issues in the briefing. The order did not grant or deny the motion to compel arbitration.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.