Baker v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-11126
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Baker v. American Society of Composers, Judge Furman ordered the parties to file a joint case-status letter after transfer to his court.
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
- Baker v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers · No. 1:21-cv-11126
- Jesse Furman
- 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.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.