Diaz v. Marriott International, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:19-cv-03865
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Diaz v. Marriott International, Inc., Judge Furman reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter by April 18, 2022.
Raven Diaz, Marriott International, Inc., and their counsel were affected by the reassignment, the status-letter requirement, and the directions concerning deadlines, conferences, extensions, and adjournments.
What happened
In Diaz v. Marriott International, Inc., the case was reassigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. The order does not describe the parties’ underlying dispute or decide its merits.
The court kept existing dates and deadlines in place, but postponed currently scheduled conferences and oral arguments before the court, except appearances before the assigned magistrate judge. It ordered the parties to file a joint letter by April 18, 2022, addressing the case’s status, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, and estimated trial length.
Judge Jesse M. Furman issued the order on April 11, 2022. The order also explained the procedure for requesting extensions or adjournments and excused the status letter if the case had been settled or otherwise terminated and proof of termination was filed before the deadline.
The detailed version
- Diaz v. Marriott International, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-03865
- Jesse Furman
- Apr. 11, 2022
Nature of the Order
This is a case-management order following reassignment of the case to Judge Furman. It does not resolve any substantive claim or defense and does not describe the underlying dispute in detail.
Court’s Directives
Unless the court orders otherwise, all existing dates and deadlines remain in effect despite the reassignment. Any currently scheduled conference or oral argument with the court is adjourned pending further order, except appearances scheduled before the assigned magistrate judge.
The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter on the electronic docket no later than April 18, 2022. The letter may not exceed five pages and must separately address:
- Counsel names and current contact information; - The nature of the case and principal defenses; - The basis for federal jurisdiction and venue, including citizenship information required for diversity jurisdiction; - Existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - Previously scheduled conferences that have not occurred; - Outstanding motions and the relief sought; - Pending appeals; - Discovery completed, including the number of depositions taken by each party, and discovery still needed for meaningful settlement negotiations; - Prior settlement discussions; - Discussions about alternative dispute resolution, including a settlement conference before a magistrate judge, the district’s mediation program, or a private mediator; - The estimated trial length; and - Other information that could assist the court in moving the case toward settlement or trial, including dispositive or novel issues.
If the case had been settled or otherwise terminated, counsel did not have to file the joint letter if a stipulation of discontinuance, voluntary dismissal, or other proof of termination was filed before the deadline using the appropriate electronic filing event.
Extensions and Adjournments
The court stated that requests for extensions or adjournments must be made by a letter-motion filed electronically at least 48 hours before the applicable deadline or conference. The request must identify the original dates, prior requests and their outcomes, the opposing party’s position, and the next scheduled appearance. Unless counsel are notified that a conference has been postponed, it will occur as scheduled.
Disposition
The court ordered the parties to file the joint status letter by April 18, 2022, subject to the stated exception for a case that had already been settled or otherwise terminated. Judge Jesse M. Furman did not rule on the merits of the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.