Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 3, 2022

Baker v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:21-cv-11126
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Baker v. American Society of Composers, Judge Furman ordered the parties to file a joint case-status letter after transfer to his court.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, defendants, and their counsel were required to comply with the case-management deadlines, joint-letter requirement, and procedures for seeking extensions or postponements.

What happened

Baker v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers was transferred to the Southern District of New York and assigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman.

The court kept existing dates and deadlines in place, but postponed any scheduled conference or oral argument until further notice. It ordered the parties to file a joint letter addressing the case, jurisdiction, deadlines, motions, discovery, settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, and trial length.

Judge Furman required the letter by January 10, 2022, unless the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated and proof of that termination was filed. The order also set procedures for requests to extend deadlines or postpone conferences.

The detailed version

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

Case
Baker v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers · No. 1:21-cv-11126
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Jan. 3, 2022

Background

The case was transferred to the Southern District of New York and assigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. The order does not decide the parties’ underlying claims or defenses.

Order

The court directed the parties to keep all existing dates and deadlines unless the court later ordered otherwise. Any currently scheduled conference or oral argument was postponed pending further order. The court also directed counsel to familiarize themselves with Judge Furman’s individual rules.

By January 10, 2022, the parties were required to file a joint letter of no more than five pages. The letter had to provide counsel’s current contact information; a brief description of the case and principal defenses; an explanation of jurisdiction and venue; all deadlines and scheduled conferences; descriptions of outstanding motions and pending appeals; details about discovery completed and still needed for settlement discussions; prior settlement discussions; the parties’ views on alternative dispute resolution; an estimate of trial length; and other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.

The letter also had to state the parties’ positions on whether the court should hold a conference about next steps and whether the case should be treated as related to No. 64-CV-3787 or another case pending in the district. If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties did not need to file the letter if they filed appropriate proof of termination before the deadline.

Disposition

Judge Furman entered a case-management order requiring the joint letter and establishing procedures for extension or postponement requests. The order required such requests to be made by letter-motion filed at least 48 hours before the relevant deadline or conference and to include specified information about prior requests, consent, and the next scheduled appearance.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.