Samson v. Fresenius North America
- Rochon
- 1:22-cv-02349
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 22
In Samson v. Fresenius North America, Judge Rochon reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter.
Hancock Samson and Fresenius North America, who were required to comply with the reassignment and joint-status-letter directives; the pro se plaintiff was also to receive the order and the judge’s rules by mail.
What happened
Hancock Samson sued Fresenius North America, and the case was reassigned to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon. The opinion does not describe the claims or defenses.
The court said that all earlier orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect unless changed. Previously scheduled appearances or conferences before the district judge were postponed, while proceedings before or directed by a magistrate judge would continue as ordered.
Judge Rochon ordered the parties to file a joint status letter within three weeks. The letter must address specified topics, including the case’s nature, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, discovery, settlement discussions, alternative dispute resolution, and estimated trial length. The order is procedural and does not decide the merits.
The detailed version
- Samson v. Fresenius North America · No. 1:22-cv-02349
- Rochon
- Sept. 23, 2022
Background
The case was reassigned to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon. The opinion identifies Hancock Samson as the plaintiff and Fresenius North America as the defendant, but it does not explain the claims, defenses, or underlying dispute.
Court’s directives
The court directed all counsel and the pro se plaintiff to become familiar with Judge Rochon’s individual rules. Unless the court later orders otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain effective. Any conference or oral argument before, or directed by, a magistrate judge must proceed as previously ordered. Previously scheduled appearances or conferences before the district judge were adjourned pending further notice.
The parties were ordered to file a joint letter within three weeks after the order was filed. The letter may not exceed four pages and must provide, as relevant, current contact information; a brief description of the case and principal defenses; the basis for jurisdiction and venue; existing deadlines; previously scheduled conferences; outstanding motions; pending appeals; discovery completed and remaining discovery; the status of settlement discussions without exact offers or demands; the parties’ views on mediation or settlement conferences; an estimate of trial length; and 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 they filed appropriate proof of termination before the deadline. The clerk was directed to mail the order and the judge’s individual rules for civil and civil pro se cases to the pro se plaintiff.
Ruling and effect
Judge Rochon issued a notice of reassignment and case-management directives. The order did not grant or deny a merits motion, decide any claim, or determine the parties’ legal rights. The case therefore remained subject to further proceedings under the existing schedule, except for district-judge appearances that were postponed pending further notice.
Read the full 22-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.