Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 18, 2020

Al's Produce LLC v. APL Co. Pte Ltd.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:20-cv-04109
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Al’s Produce v. APL, Judge Schofield granted extensions for service and the initial conference, while warning no further service extensions would be granted.

Who this affects

Al’s Produce LLC received more time to serve APL Co. Pte Ltd. and to prepare for the initial pretrial conference; APL was subject to the new schedule and the warning that no further service extensions would be granted.

What happened

Al’s Produce LLC sued APL Co. Pte Ltd. over alleged damage to three asparagus shipments transported by ocean from Peru to the United States in 2018. The parties were engaged in settlement discussions, and APL consented to Al’s Produce’s requests.

Al’s Produce asked for 60 more days to serve the summons and complaint and to postpone the initial pretrial conference. The court extended the service deadline from August 27 to October 26, 2020, and postponed the conference from September 17 to November 19, 2020.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the application and ordered the conference materials filed by November 12, 2020. The court warned that it would not grant any further extensions to serve APL.

The detailed version

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

Case
Al's Produce LLC v. APL Co. Pte Ltd. · No. 1:20-cv-04109
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Aug. 18, 2020

Background

Al’s Produce LLC brought this action seeking recovery for alleged damage to three shipments of fresh asparagus transported by ocean carriage from Peru to the United States between August and October 2018. The shipments were made under bills of lading issued by APL Co. Pte Ltd. The opinion text states that the action was commenced on May 29, 2020.

The plaintiff’s counsel reported that the parties were engaged in settlement discussions. Al’s Produce had proposed that APL waive formal service, but counsel said that APL’s claims department was having difficulty signing and returning the waiver because of office closures related to the COVID-19 pandemic. APL had not formally appeared through counsel, but its associate cargo claims manager reviewed the request and consented to the requested relief.

Requests and Ruling

Al’s Produce requested a 60-day extension of the deadline to serve the summons and complaint under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It also requested a 60-day adjournment of the initial pretrial conference. The court granted the application. The service deadline was extended from August 27, 2020, to October 26, 2020. The initial pretrial conference was adjourned from September 17, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. to November 19, 2020, at 10:30 a.m.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered the parties to file conference materials by November 12, 2020 and provided telephone-conference instructions. The court stated that no further extensions to effect service would be granted. The order addressed scheduling and service only; the text does not state that the court decided the underlying claims concerning the asparagus shipments.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.