Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 5, 2023

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Gorman

Judge
Clarke
Docket
1:21-cv-00870
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Gorman, Judge Clarke reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter while keeping existing deadlines and conference date.

Who this affects

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, John Patrick Gorman III, and their counsel were affected by the reassignment, joint-letter requirement, preserved deadlines, and conference instructions.

What happened

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Gorman was reassigned to a new judge, while the court kept the existing deadlines and scheduled case-management conference in place unless it later ordered otherwise.

The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter by July 19, 2023, describing the case, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible alternative dispute resolution, and estimated trial length. The case-management conference remained scheduled for August 30, 2024.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke issued the reassignment notice and related filing and conference instructions. The opinion did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Gorman · No. 1:21-cv-00870
Judge
Clarke
Date
July 5, 2023

Action by the Court

The case was reassigned to United States District Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. The court stated that, unless it ordered otherwise, all existing dates and deadlines would remain in effect despite the reassignment. This included a case-management conference scheduled for August 30, 2024, at 10:00 a.m., before Judge Clarke in Courtroom 20C of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse.

Required Joint Letter

The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter on the electronic docket no later than July 19, 2023. The letter could not exceed five pages, except that lengthy citizenship information could be placed in an appendix outside the page limit. The parties were directed to provide separate paragraphs addressing:

- counsel’s names and current contact information; - the nature of the case, principal defenses, and major legal and factual issues; - why federal jurisdiction and venue were proper in the Southern District of New York, including specified citizenship information when applicable; - all existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - prior matters and scheduled conferences to be discussed with the court; - outstanding motions and the relief requested; - pending appeals; - discovery completed and discovery remaining that could assist settlement negotiations; - the status of settlement discussions without revealing exact offers or demands; - whether the parties had discussed alternative dispute resolution and which options might be appropriate; - the estimated trial length; and - any other information that might help move the case toward settlement or trial, including dispositive or novel issues.

If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties did not have to file the letter or appear, provided that proof of termination was filed before the deadline using the appropriate electronic-docket procedure.

Extensions and Adjournments

The court stated that requests to extend a deadline or adjourn a conference had to be made by a letter-motion filed electronically at least 48 hours before the relevant deadline or conference. The request had to identify the original and requested new dates, prior extension requests and their outcomes, the reason for the request, the opposing party’s position, and the next scheduled court appearance when applicable. Unless the parties were notified that a conference had been adjourned, it would proceed as scheduled.

Disposition and Scope

The court entered a reassignment and case-management order. It did not rule on the merits of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s claims or John Patrick Gorman III’s defenses.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.