Cargian v. Breitling USA, Inc.
- George Daniels
- 1:15-cv-01084
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Cargian v. Breitling USA, Inc., Judge Daniels reopened the case’s active docket, postponed a conference, and set briefing for a possible renewed summary-judgment motion.
Frederick M. Cargian and Breitling USA, Inc.; the action was returned to the active docket, the status conference was postponed, and briefing deadlines were set for a possible renewed summary-judgment motion.
What happened
In Cargian v. Breitling USA, Inc., the court directed the Clerk to move the action from the suspense docket to the active docket.
The court postponed the October 14, 2020 status conference until February 3, 2021, at 9:45 a.m. It also allowed Breitling USA, Inc. to renew its summary-judgment motion and submit a letter addressing the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, and earlier summary-judgment decisions.
Judge Daniels set November 9, 2020, for the defendant’s letter, December 9, 2020, for the plaintiff’s opposition, and December 23, 2020, for any reply. The order did not decide the summary-judgment motion.
The detailed version
- Cargian v. Breitling USA, Inc. · No. 1:15-cv-01084
- George Daniels
- Oct. 8, 2020
Background
The opinion is an administrative and scheduling order in the action brought by Frederick M. Cargian against Breitling USA, Inc. It does not describe the underlying claims or provide a ruling on the parties’ substantive legal dispute.
Court’s Actions
The court directed the Clerk of Court to remove the action from the suspense docket and place it on the active docket. The court adjourned the status conference scheduled for October 14, 2020, to February 3, 2021, at 9:45 a.m.
The court stated that Breitling USA, Inc. may renew its motion for summary judgment and supplement its earlier submissions with a letter explaining why summary judgment is warranted under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, and prior summary-judgment decisions. The defendant’s letter is due November 9, 2020; Cargian’s opposition is due December 9, 2020; and any reply is due December 23, 2020.
Disposition
Judge George B. Daniels issued a scheduling and docket-management order. The opinion does not grant or deny the summary-judgment motion and does not resolve the merits of the case.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.