Ong v. Deloitte Consulting LLP

Background

Deloitte Consulting LLP filed a motion to dismiss on May 25, 2021. This order addressed the next procedural steps; it did not rule on whether the motion should be granted or denied.

Required response

Under the court’s individual practices, Yani Ong had to notify the court and Deloitte in writing by June 11, 2021, whether Ong intended to file an amended pleading and when, or instead would rely on the pleading challenged by Deloitte’s motion. The court warned that declining to amend in response to a fully presented argument could potentially waive the opportunity to use amendment to correct defects identified in the motion. The order cited a prior appellate decision concerning when leave to amend may properly be denied, including for undue delay, bad faith, a dilatory motive, or futility.

If Ong amended, Deloitte could file an answer, file a new motion to dismiss, or submit a letter stating that it relied on its original motion. The order stated that it did not change the deadlines for amending, answering, or filing a motion under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the court’s local rules.

Other scheduling ruling and disposition

The court postponed the initial pretrial conference scheduled for July 2, 2021, until the motion to dismiss was resolved. Judge Alison J. Nathan therefore issued a procedural scheduling order, not a decision on the merits of Ong’s claims or Deloitte’s motion.