Devens v. Sanofi S.A.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:23-cv-04706
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Devens v. Sanofi S.A., Judge Furman ordered counsel to attend a conference and file a joint case-status letter after the case’s transfer.
Laura Devens, Sanofi S.A. and the other defendants, and counsel for all parties were affected by the conference, joint-letter, and scheduling requirements.
What happened
In Devens v. Sanofi S.A., the case had been transferred to the Southern District of New York. The court said that prior orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless changed, but any previously scheduled conference or oral argument before the court was postponed.
The court ordered counsel for all parties to attend a remote telephone conference on June 28, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. The parties also had to file a joint letter addressing the case’s status, including jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, expected motions, discovery, settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, and trial length.
Judge Jesse M. Furman issued the notice on June 8, 2023. The order did not decide the parties’ underlying legal claims or defenses.
The detailed version
- Devens v. Sanofi S.A. · No. 1:23-cv-04706
- Jesse Furman
- June 8, 2023
Purpose of the Order
The court issued a notice of conference after the case was transferred to the Southern District of New York. The order states that, unless the court later orders otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain effective despite the transfer. Any conference or oral argument already scheduled before the court was postponed pending further order.
Conference and Joint Letter
The court ordered counsel for all parties to appear remotely by telephone for a conference on June 28, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. Unless the court granted permission in advance, all pretrial conferences had to be attended by the attorney who would serve as principal trial counsel.
The parties were also ordered to file a joint letter of no more than five pages by Thursday of the week before the conference. The letter had to provide:
- The names and current contact information of counsel; - A brief description of the case and principal defenses; - An explanation of why federal jurisdiction and venue were proper, including specified citizenship information for entities in diversity cases; - All existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - A description of anticipated motions; - A detailed account of discovery completed and remaining, including the status of Wave 1 discovery and any case-specific discovery; - Prior settlement discussions; - The parties’ views on possible alternative dispute resolution, including a settlement conference, mediation through the district’s mediation program, or a private mediator; - An estimate of the trial’s length; and - Other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.
Other Instructions and Effect
If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, counsel did not have to appear or file the joint letter if proof of termination was filed by the deadline. Requests to extend a deadline or postpone the conference had to be made through a letter-motion filed at least 48 hours before the deadline or conference and had to include the information specified in the order.
Judge Jesse M. Furman’s order addressed case management and scheduling. It did not resolve the merits of Devens’s claims or Sanofi S.A.’s defenses.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.