Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 15, 2022

Liberty Holdings LLC v. Aposta, Inc.

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:18-cv-05108
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
22
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Liberty Holdings v. Aposta, Judge Rochon reassigned the case, kept existing deadlines, adjourned district-court appearances, and required a status letter.

Who this affects

The parties, their counsel, and the pro se plaintiff are affected by the reassignment, continuing deadlines, adjourned district-court appearances, and required joint status letter.

What happened

Liberty Holdings (NYC) LLC v. Aposta, Inc. was reassigned to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon in the Southern District of New York. The notice states that prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect unless the court orders otherwise.

The court adjourned previously scheduled district-court appearances and directed the parties to confer about the case. Within three weeks, defendants must file and serve a joint status letter, limited to four pages, covering matters such as the case’s status, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, discovery, settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, and estimated trial length.

Judge Rochon also directed the Clerk to mail the order and her practice rules to the pro se plaintiff, meaning the plaintiff without a lawyer. This notice made no ruling on the claims or defenses and did not decide the merits of the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Liberty Holdings LLC v. Aposta, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-05108
Judge
Rochon
Date
Sept. 15, 2022

Nature of the Order

This is a notice of reassignment and case-management order, not a decision on the parties’ underlying claims or defenses. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon stated that the case had been reassigned to her and directed counsel and the pro se plaintiff to familiarize themselves with her individual rules.

Effect of Reassignment

Unless the court orders otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect despite the reassignment. Conferences or oral arguments before, or directed by, a magistrate judge must proceed as previously ordered. Previously scheduled appearances or conferences before the district court are adjourned until the court provides further notice.

Required Joint Status Letter

The parties must confer and prepare a joint letter within three weeks after the order’s filing. Defendants must file the letter on the court’s electronic filing system and serve it on the pro se plaintiff. The letter may not exceed four pages and must address, to the extent relevant, the following matters:

- current names and contact information for counsel and the pro se plaintiff; - the nature of the case and principal defenses; - the basis for federal jurisdiction and venue, including specified citizenship information for entities if diversity jurisdiction is asserted; - existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - previously scheduled but uncompleted conferences; - outstanding motions and the relief sought; - pending appeals; - discovery completed and discovery remaining that is essential to meaningful settlement discussions; - the status of settlement discussions without revealing exact offers or demands; - whether alternative dispute resolution, such as a settlement conference, mediation, 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.

If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties did not need to submit the letter or appear if proof of termination was filed before the submission deadline.

Disposition and Classification

The court reassigned the case and issued case-management directives. It did not grant or deny a merits motion, dismiss any claim, enter judgment, or decide jurisdiction. The order is therefore classified as a procedural order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 22-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.