Chen v. Matsu Fusion Restaurant Inc

Background

Matsu Fusion Restaurant Inc. and Yi Chang Chen, identified as the “Moving Defendants,” filed two motions on November 13, 2020. One sought dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) of J & J Asian Bistro Inc.’s crossclaim. The other sought to strike J & J’s affirmative defenses under Rule 12(f).

Amendment and briefing deadlines

The court explained that Rule 15(a)(1)(B) gives a party 21 days after service of a Rule 12(b) or Rule 12(f) motion to amend its pleading once as a matter of course. The court ordered J & J to file any amended pleading by December 4, 2020, and stated that J & J would receive no further opportunity to amend to address the issues raised by the motion to dismiss.

If J & J amended its pleading, the Moving Defendants had three weeks after the amended pleading was filed to answer, file a new motion to dismiss and/or strike, or file an electronic letter stating that they relied on the earlier motion. If they filed an answer or a new motion, the court would deny the earlier motion as moot. Any opposition to a new motion would be due within 14 days, and any reply would be due within seven days after the opposition.

If J & J did not amend its pleading, its opposition to the pending motion was due December 4, 2020. Any reply from the Moving Defendants was due December 11, 2020.

Pretrial conference

The court ordered all remaining parties to appear for a pretrial conference on January 27, 2021, at 3:30 p.m. The parties had to confer beforehand about the subjects covered by a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 conference. They also had to file, by Thursday of the week before the conference, a joint letter and a proposed Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order using the court’s form.

The joint letter could not exceed five pages and had to address the nature of the case and defenses, the basis for jurisdiction and venue, existing deadlines, outstanding motions, completed and necessary discovery, prior settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, and other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.

Disposition

Judge Jesse M. Furman issued a scheduling and case-management order. The opinion did not grant or deny the pending motion to dismiss or motion to strike; instead, it established the next amendment and briefing steps and set the pretrial conference.