Keung v. Sun Hop Lee, Inc.
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:19-cv-04589
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Keung v. Sun Hop Lee, Inc., Magistrate Judge Gorenstein extended a filing deadline but denied the plaintiff’s request to resolve late discovery disputes.
The plaintiff and his counsel received additional time to file pretrial materials but could not obtain court resolution of the discovery disputes after the discovery deadline had passed; the case remained subject to possible dismissal if the required materials were not filed by May 8, 2020.
What happened
In Keung v. Sun Hop Lee, Inc., the plaintiff responded to an order requiring an explanation for failing to meet a filing deadline. The response also asked the court to resolve discovery disputes.
The court extended the deadline for filing required pretrial materials to May 8, 2020. It warned that the case could be dismissed without further notice if the materials were not filed by then. The court denied the request to resolve discovery disputes because discovery had closed on January 10, 2020, and the deadline had not been extended.
Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein issued the order on April 15, 2020.
The detailed version
- Keung v. Sun Hop Lee, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-04589
- Paul Gardephe
- Apr. 15, 2020
Background
The plaintiff responded to the court’s order to show cause, which required an explanation for failing to meet a deadline. The court found that the response did little to explain why the plaintiff’s counsel had ignored the court’s order instead of requesting an extension. The response also asked the court to resolve certain discovery disputes.
Rulings
The court granted an extension until May 8, 2020, for filing the pretrial-order materials required by Section X of Judge Gardephe’s Individual Practices. The court stated that the case may be dismissed without further notice if the materials were not filed by that date.
The court denied the plaintiff’s request to resolve discovery disputes. Discovery had closed on January 10, 2020, and the court had not extended that deadline. The court stated that any discovery dispute had to be presented before discovery closed, consistent with the court’s prior order and the cited decision in Owen v. No Parking Today, Inc.
Effect of the Order
The order did not dismiss the case. It extended the pretrial-materials deadline and denied the request to address discovery disputes. The order was signed by Gabriel W. Gorenstein, United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.