Marquez v. Silver
- Andrew Carter
- 1:18-cv-07315
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Marquez v. Silver, Magistrate Judge Gorenstein ordered briefing on possible sanctions against Alexis Marquez under Rule 16(f).
Alexis Marquez and the defendants in the case, who were required to submit briefing about possible sanctions.
What happened
In Marquez v. Silver, the court addressed a pending sanctions motion filed in response to an earlier court order. The defendants identified conduct by plaintiff Alexis Marquez that they said could warrant sanctions.
The court directed both sides to submit a short supplemental letter or legal memorandum addressing whether Marquez’s conduct merits sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f). The court did not decide whether sanctions should be imposed.
Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein set August 10, 2022, for the parties’ submissions and August 17, 2022, for any reply. The defendants were also ordered to send Marquez a copy of the order by email.
The detailed version
- Marquez v. Silver · No. 1:18-cv-07315
- Andrew Carter
- Aug. 3, 2022
Background
The order concerns a pending motion for sanctions, docket number 385, filed in response to the court’s previous order, docket number 373. The defendants’ brief identified plaintiff Alexis Marquez’s conduct on pages 2 through 18. The court directed the parties to address whether that conduct merits sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f), which allows sanctions for certain failures involving court scheduling or pretrial orders.
Court’s Direction
The court explained that, in the Southern District of New York, the standards for sanctions under Rule 16(f) are the same as the standards commonly applied under Rule 37. Because the parties had already fully briefed sanctions under Rule 37(b), the court did not expect the supplemental submissions to repeat the legal standards. The court stated, however, that it was not limiting what the parties could add about whether Marquez’s conduct merits sanctions under Rule 16(f).
Deadlines and Disposition
Each party’s supplemental submission was due August 10, 2022, and any reply was due August 17, 2022. The defendants were directed to transmit a copy of the order to Marquez by email. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein ordered additional briefing; the opinion does not impose sanctions or resolve the pending sanctions motion.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.