Glaz LLC v. Sysco Corporation

Background

Petitioners described in the letter as affiliates of Burford Capital Ltd. filed a petition in New York state court seeking confirmation of an arbitration award. The award concerned Sysco’s proposed settlements of antitrust claims pending in federal courts in Illinois and Minnesota. Sysco removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York before responding to the petition.

Sysco had also requested a conference concerning a motion to transfer the action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Sysco said it had moved in that court to vacate the arbitration award and argued that the Illinois court was the more appropriate forum. The letter stated that Sysco’s deadline to respond to the petition was April 3, 2023.

Requests

Sysco asked the court to stay, or pause, its response deadline while the court considered the transfer motion. It argued that a pause could avoid duplicative briefing and conserve judicial resources. In the alternative, Sysco requested a 30-day extension, until May 3, 2023. The letter stated that this was Sysco’s first request for an extension in the action and that the petitioners did not consent.

Ruling

Judge Paul G. Gardephe granted the defendant’s motion for an extension of time to respond. The endorsement states that Sysco’s response to the petition was due May 3, 2023 and directs the clerk to terminate the motion filed at docket entry 9. The supplied text does not state a separate ruling on Sysco’s alternative request to stay the deadline.