Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 18, 2023

PRCM Advisers LLC v. Two Harbors Investment Corp.

Judge
Lewis Kaplan
Docket
1:20-cv-05649
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In PRCM Advisers v. Two Harbors, Judge Moses ordered further discussions about admissions requests and granted sealing motions.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, PRCM Advisers LLC and the other plaintiffs identified in the caption, and Two Harbors Investment Corp.; the order also directs the parties’ handling of the defendant’s requests for admission and specified sealed exhibits.

What happened

In PRCM Advisers LLC v. Two Harbors Investment Corp., the court directed the parties to meet and try in good faith to resolve their remaining disagreements about the defendant’s requests for admission. The parties had to submit a joint letter by May 31, 2023, identifying any requests still requiring a court ruling.

The court granted the plaintiffs’ motions to keep Exhibits F and H under seal, citing the reasons in the plaintiffs’ sealing motion. It also directed the clerk to close the motions listed at docket numbers 293, 295, and 302.

Barbara Moses, the United States Magistrate Judge who signed the order, issued these discovery and sealing directives on May 18, 2023.

The detailed version

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

Case
PRCM Advisers LLC v. Two Harbors Investment Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-05649
Judge
Lewis Kaplan
Date
May 18, 2023

Background

During a conference, the court ruled on exemplar requests for admission identified by the plaintiffs. The parties still had disagreements about the defendant’s requests for admission, or RFAs—formal requests asking another party to admit or deny stated facts.

Order

The court ordered the parties to meet and confer in a good-faith effort to resolve their remaining RFA disputes in accordance with the conference rulings. By May 31, 2023, they had to submit a joint letter identifying any RFAs or ranges of RFAs on which they still could not agree and for which they needed a ruling. The court also reminded the parties that a properly drafted RFA should be worded so it can be admitted or denied without explanation.

The court granted the letter-motions at docket numbers 295 and 302 to keep Exhibits F and H to the defendant’s April 26, 2023 letter under seal, for substantially the reasons stated in the plaintiffs’ sealing motion. The clerk was directed to close the motions at docket numbers 293, 295, and 302.

Disposition

The court issued discovery instructions, granted the two sealing motions, and directed the clerk to close the listed motions. The order was signed by Barbara Moses, United States Magistrate Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.