United States Court Security Officers v. United States Marshals Service

What the order did

The case was reassigned to United States District Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. The court stated that all earlier orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless the court later ordered otherwise. Any conference or oral argument already scheduled before the court was adjourned pending further order.

Required status update

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, apart from any appendix needed for lengthy citizenship information. It had to address:

- Counsel’s names and current contact information; - The nature of the case, principal defenses, and important legal and factual issues; - Why federal jurisdiction and venue were proper in the court; - Existing deadlines and previously scheduled conferences; - Outstanding motions and any pending appeals; - Discovery completed and discovery still needed for meaningful settlement discussions; - The status of prior settlement discussions without revealing exact offers or demands; - Whether the parties had discussed mediation or other alternative dispute-resolution options; - The estimated trial length; and - Any other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.

If the case had been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties did not have to file the letter or appear if they filed an appropriate stipulation, voluntary dismissal, or other proof of termination on the docket before the deadline.

Extension and postponement requests

The court stated that requests to extend a deadline or postpone a conference had to be made by a letter-motion filed electronically at least 48 hours before the deadline or conference. The request had to identify the original and requested new dates, prior requests, the reason for the request, the opposing party’s position, and any next scheduled court appearance. Unless the court notified counsel that a conference had been postponed, the conference would occur as scheduled.

Disposition and significance

This was a case-management order. It reassigned the case and required a status report; it did not rule on the merits of the dispute or decide any motion.