Zeta Global Corp. v. Maropost Marketing Cloud, Inc.

Background

The initial pretrial conference was scheduled for August 27, 2020. Maropost advised that it intended to move to dismiss Counts I, II, and III of Zeta Global’s complaint under the doctrine of forum non conveniens. The order refers to those counts as the “non-patent claims.” Counts IV, V, and VI are patent-infringement claims.

Court’s Orders

The court canceled the initial pretrial conference, while allowing the parties to ask that it be reinstated if they believed a conference would be useful. The court stated that a case-management plan for the patent-infringement claims would issue separately.

The court waived Maropost’s requirement to file a pre-motion letter before filing its planned motion to dismiss the non-patent claims. The court directed that the motion’s briefing schedule would be governed by Local Civil Rule 6.1 and reminded Maropost that its deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint was October 2, 2020.

The court also stayed discovery on the non-patent claims until the planned motion to dismiss is resolved. Discovery on the patent-infringement claims was not stayed. The court cited its authority under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 to control discovery and found that Maropost’s proposed motion appeared to have substantial grounds, while Zeta Global would face little prejudice because discovery on the patent claims could continue.

Effect of the Order

This is a case-management and discovery order. It does not grant or deny Maropost’s planned motion to dismiss and does not decide the merits of the claims. The court also warned that discovery deadlines would not be extended absent compelling circumstances.