Vuppala v. Land of Buddha, Inc.
- Clarke
- 1:22-cv-09044
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Vuppala v. Land of Buddha, Judge Clarke reassigned the case, adjourned an October 5, 2023 status conference, and ordered a joint status letter.
Kiran Vuppala, Land of Buddha, Inc., 7 Mon LLC, and their counsel were affected by the reassignment, the adjournment of the October 5, 2023 status conference, and the required joint status letter and filing procedures.
What happened
In Vuppala v. Land of Buddha, the court announced that the case had been reassigned to Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. The court stated that prior orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect, except that the October 5, 2023 status conference was adjourned.
The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter by August 11, 2023. The letter had to provide information about counsel, the case, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, conferences, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, and the expected trial length.
Judge Clarke also stated that extension or adjournment requests had to be made by letter-motion at least 48 hours before the relevant deadline or conference. This notice did not decide the parties’ underlying claims or defenses.
The detailed version
- Vuppala v. Land of Buddha, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-09044
- Clarke
- July 19, 2023
Nature of the Order
This was a reassignment and case-management order, not a decision on the merits of the parties’ claims or defenses. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke announced that the case had been reassigned to her.
Effect on Existing Schedule
The court ordered that all prior orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless the court later ordered otherwise, including the order identified as Docket 17. The court adjourned the status conference scheduled for October 5, 2023.
Required Joint Letter
The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter on the electronic filing system by August 11, 2023. The letter could not exceed five pages, excluding any appendix containing lengthy jurisdictional information. It had to address:
- 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, including the citizenship information required for corporations and unincorporated entities in diversity cases; - all existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - previously scheduled conferences that had not occurred and the subjects to be discussed; - outstanding motions and the relief sought; - pending appeals; - discovery already completed and discovery still needed for meaningful settlement discussions; - the status of settlement discussions without stating exact offers or demands; - the estimated trial length; and - any other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial, including dispositive or novel issues.
If the case had been settled or otherwise terminated, the court said counsel would not need to file the letter or appear, provided that proof of termination was filed before the deadline.
Requests to Change Dates
The court stated that requests for extensions or adjournments could be made only by letter-motion filed electronically at least 48 hours before the deadline or conference. The submission had to identify the original and requested dates, prior requests, the reason for the request, the opposing party’s position, and, when applicable, the date of the next court appearance. Unless counsel were notified that a conference had been adjourned, the conference would occur as scheduled.
Disposition
Judge Clarke entered the reassignment and case-management directives described above. The order did not grant or deny a dispositive motion and did not resolve the underlying dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.