Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 29, 2023

De Dios De Los Santos v. Shree Laxmi Restaurant, Inc.

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:22-cv-10774
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In De Dios De Los Santos v. Shree Laxmi Restaurant, Judge Parker set case-management, pleading, discovery, and reporting deadlines.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, defendants, and their counsel were required to follow the scheduling, discovery, and status-reporting requirements.

What happened

In De Dios De Los Santos v. Shree Laxmi Restaurant, the parties appeared for an initial case-management conference on March 28, 2023. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or dispute.

The court entered a scheduling order under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It set deadlines for amending pleadings and joining parties, completing discovery, exchanging discovery requests, conducting expert discovery and depositions, making requests for admissions, and filing a joint status letter. It also limited each party to five depositions and instructed counsel about discovery requirements.

Judge Katharine H. Parker ordered the parties to follow the schedule and the court’s procedures for discovery disputes. The order did not decide the merits of the parties’ claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
De Dios De Los Santos v. Shree Laxmi Restaurant, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-10774
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
Mar. 29, 2023

Nature of the Order

This is a scheduling order under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. After the parties appeared for an initial case-management conference, the court set deadlines governing pleadings, party joinder, discovery, and case-status reporting. The opinion does not address the merits of the underlying claims.

Pleadings and Parties

The parties could amend the pleadings or join additional parties until April 28, 2023. After that date, further amendments or joinder required good cause.

Discovery Schedule

The deadline to complete all discovery was October 10,

  1. The parties were required to finalize an electronic-discovery protocol by May 11,
  2. Initial requests for document production and initial interrogatories—written questions used in discovery—were due by June 12,
  3. Any later interrogatories were due by September 11, 2023.

Expert discovery had to be completed by September 18, 2023. Depositions were due to be completed by September 28, 2023, and each party was limited to five depositions. Requests for admissions were due by October 3, 2023. The parties could adjust interim discovery deadlines by agreement without seeking court approval.

Discovery Requirements

The court directed counsel to follow its individual procedures for discovery disputes and to comply with Rules 1 and 26(b)(1). It also directed counsel to understand their obligations under Rules 34 and 26(g), including discussing ways to avoid overly broad or insufficiently specific document requests and responses. The order warned that failure to comply could have serious consequences, and it stated that unexplained or inadequately specific objections could be treated as forfeited, except for privilege objections.

Status Report and Disposition

The parties were required to file a joint status letter by May 12, 2023, updating the court on discovery and stating whether they wanted the court to schedule a settlement conference. Judge Katharine H. Parker entered the scheduling order. No claim, defense, or motion was resolved in the order.

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.