Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 11, 2022

Weekes v. Net Retailers, Inc.

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:21-cv-10214
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Weekes v. Net Retailers, Inc., Judge Furman reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter; the order did not decide the claims.

Who this affects

Robert Weekes, Net Retailers Inc., and the parties’ counsel were required to comply with the case-management and joint-letter requirements.

What happened

In Weekes v. Net Retailers, Inc., the case was reassigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. The order did not address the parties’ underlying claims or defenses.

The court required the parties to file a joint letter by April 18, 2022, updating the court on counsel, the case’s status, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible mediation, and the estimated trial length. Existing deadlines remained in effect, but scheduled conferences or oral arguments before the court were postponed unless otherwise ordered.

Judge Furman also stated that requests to extend deadlines or postpone conferences had to be made by letter motion at least 48 hours in advance. If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated and proof was filed by the deadline, the joint letter was not required.

The detailed version

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

Case
Weekes v. Net Retailers, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-10214
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Apr. 11, 2022

Nature of the Order

This is a case-management order. The court stated that the case had been reassigned to Judge Furman and directed the parties to provide a joint status update. The order did not decide the merits of the claims or defenses.

Required Joint Letter

Unless the case had been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties had to file a joint letter on the electronic docket by April 18, 2022. The letter could not exceed five pages and had to address:

- Counsel’s names and current contact information; - The nature of the case and principal defenses; - The bases for federal jurisdiction and venue, including required citizenship information for certain entities; - Existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - Previously scheduled conferences that had not occurred; - Outstanding motions and the relief requested; - Pending appeals; - Discovery completed and discovery needed for meaningful settlement discussions; - Prior settlement discussions; - Whether alternative dispute resolution, such as a settlement conference, mediation through the district’s program, or a private mediator, would be appropriate; - The estimated trial length; and - Any other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.

Deadlines and Conferences

The court ordered that existing dates and deadlines remain in effect despite the reassignment. Scheduled conferences or oral arguments with the court were adjourned pending further order, except for appearances scheduled before the assigned magistrate judge. Requests to extend deadlines or postpone conferences had to be filed as letter motions at least 48 hours before the relevant deadline or conference and had to include specified information about prior requests, the opposing party’s position, and the next scheduled appearance.

Disposition

The court ordered the joint status letter and set out procedures for requesting extensions or adjournments. Judge Jesse M. Furman did not rule on the underlying claims, defenses, or any motion for merits relief.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.