EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-08076
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC, Judge Moses ordered further briefing on EFCG’s proposed copyright-protection procedure.
EFCG, Inc. and the defendants, including AEC Advisors, LLC, were required to participate in the court-ordered meet-and-confer and briefing process.
What happened
EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC concerns EFCG’s request for a court-supervised process before the defendants distribute a new survey for their September 15, 2020 online summit. EFCG said the proposed survey might infringe its copyright.
The court ordered EFCG to meet and discuss the request with the defendants, then file a supplemental letter addressing whether the defendants consent and identifying legal authority for the proposed procedure if they do not. The defendants and EFCG were given deadlines for responding and replying. The order did not approve or reject the proposed procedure.
Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses issued the order. She did not decide the copyright-infringement claim or whether EFCG was entitled to an injunction.
The detailed version
- EFCG, Inc. v. AEC Advisors, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-08076
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 28, 2020
Background
EFCG’s counsel submitted a letter requesting approval of a proposed “Status Quo Procedure” concerning a survey that the defendants planned to distribute before an online chief executive summit scheduled for September 15, 2020. EFCG alleged that an earlier survey distributed by the defendants was substantially similar to EFCG’s copyrighted survey and infringed EFCG’s copyright.
According to EFCG’s letter, the defendants said they would not distribute the earlier survey in its original form but intended to distribute a different survey that had not yet been created. EFCG was concerned that the new survey could also infringe its copyright and proposed that the defendants disclose the survey one month before distribution, that the parties meet and discuss whether it could be made non-infringing, and that EFCG have an opportunity to seek court relief if the parties could not agree.
Court’s Order
The court stated that EFCG’s letter-motion was within the scope of the court’s amended reference. It ordered EFCG to promptly meet and confer with the defendants in good faith and in real time about the requested relief. EFCG then had to file a supplemental letter by June 3, 2020, limited to three pages, certifying that the parties had met, stating whether and to what extent the defendants consented to the proposed procedure, and—if they did not consent—identifying the statute, rule, or legal principle that authorized the court to preserve the status quo and prevent irreparable harm through that procedure.
The defendants could file a response by June 10, 2020, limited to four pages, and EFCG could file a reply by June 12, 2020, limited to two pages. The order did not grant or deny EFCG’s proposed Status Quo Procedure. It also did not decide the underlying copyright claim or the parties’ entitlement to preliminary injunctive relief.
Disposition and Effect
The order required additional meet-and-confer efforts and briefing; it did not resolve the requested procedure. Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses signed the order. The supplied case information identifies Ronnie Abrams as the assigned judge, while the order itself is signed by Barbara Moses; this summary treats Barbara Moses as the judge who issued this order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.