Select Harvest USA LLC v. Indian Overseas Bank
- Clarke
- 1:22-cv-03931
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Select Harvest USA LLC v. Indian Overseas Bank, Judge Clarke reassigned the case, rescheduled a conference, and ordered a joint status letter.
Select Harvest USA LLC, Indian Overseas Bank, and their counsel are affected by the reassignment, conference date, joint-letter requirement, and procedures for seeking schedule changes.
What happened
Select Harvest USA LLC v. Indian Overseas Bank was reassigned to Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke in the Southern District of New York. The notice did not discuss the dispute’s underlying issues or decide any claims.
Judge Clarke moved the remote status conference from July 18, 2023, to July 25, 2023. She also ordered the parties to file a joint letter no later than one week before the conference, covering the case’s status, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, motions, discovery, settlement, possible alternative dispute resolution, and trial length.
The court kept all prior orders, dates, and deadlines in effect unless it later orders otherwise. Judge Clarke also set procedures for requesting extensions or adjournments and stated that the conference would proceed unless counsel were notified that it had been postponed.
The detailed version
- Select Harvest USA LLC v. Indian Overseas Bank · No. 1:22-cv-03931
- Clarke
- July 13, 2023
Nature of the Order
This notice records the reassignment of the case to Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. It is an administrative and scheduling order, not a decision on the parties’ underlying dispute.
Scheduling and Status Conference
The court stated that all prior orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless the court ordered otherwise. The court rescheduled the status conference from July 18, 2023, at 3:00 p.m. to July 25, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. The conference would be held remotely through Microsoft Teams before Judge Clarke.
Required Joint Letter
The parties were ordered to file a joint letter on the electronic docket no later than one week before the status conference. The letter could not exceed five pages, except that lengthy information about the citizenship of members, partners, shareholders, or trustees could be placed in an appendix outside the page limit. The letter had to address counsel’s contact information; the nature of the case, defenses, and major legal and factual issues; the basis for federal jurisdiction and venue; existing deadlines; scheduled conferences; outstanding motions; pending appeals; completed and needed discovery; prior settlement discussions without exact offers or demands; possible alternative dispute resolution; estimated trial length; and other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.
If the case had already been settled or otherwise terminated, counsel did not have to file the letter or appear if proof of termination was filed before the deadline using the appropriate electronic filing procedure.
Requests to Change Dates
The court stated that requests to extend a deadline or postpone a conference had to be made by a letter-motion filed electronically and received at least 48 hours before the relevant deadline or conference. The request had to identify the original and requested new dates, prior requests and their outcomes, the reason for the request, the opposing party’s position, and, when applicable, the next scheduled court appearance. Unless counsel were told that a conference had been postponed, it would occur as scheduled.
Disposition
The court entered the reassignment and scheduling directives described above. The order did not grant or deny a merits motion, resolve a claim, or state a final outcome for the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.