Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 26, 2023

Ornua Foods North America, Inc. v. Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC

Judge
Clarke
Docket
1:23-cv-01212
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Ornua Foods North America v. Abbey Specialty Foods, Judge Clarke reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter by August 8, 2023.

Who this affects

Ornua Foods North America, Inc., Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC, and their counsel, who must comply with the status-letter and case-management requirements unless the case is terminated and proof of termination is filed.

What happened

Ornua Foods North America, Inc. v. Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC was reassigned to a new judge. The notice says that all earlier orders, dates, and deadlines—including Docket No. 35—remain in effect unless the court orders otherwise.

The parties were ordered to file a joint letter of no more than five pages by August 8, 2023. The letter must update the court on counsel, the case and its issues, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, conferences, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible mediation, and the estimated trial length.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke also explained procedures for requesting extensions or adjournments. This order manages the case but does not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ornua Foods North America, Inc. v. Abbey Specialty Foods, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-01212
Judge
Clarke
Date
July 26, 2023

Background

The case was reassigned to Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. The notice states that all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect unless the court orders otherwise, including the order identified as Docket No. 35. The opinion does not describe the parties’ underlying claims or defenses.

Order

The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter on the electronic docket by August 8, 2023. The letter may not exceed five pages, except that lengthy information about the citizenship of an entity’s members, shareholders, partners, or trustees may be placed in an appendix outside the page limit.

The letter must provide separate paragraphs addressing:

- Counsel’s names and current contact information; - The nature of the case, principal defenses, and major legal and factual issues; - The basis for federal jurisdiction and venue, including the information required to establish diversity of citizenship when applicable; - Existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - Uncompleted conferences and the subjects those conferences were expected to address; - Outstanding motions and the relief requested; - Pending appeals; - Discovery completed and discovery remaining, including the number of depositions taken by each party; - The status of settlement discussions without stating exact offers or demands; - Whether the parties have considered a settlement conference, the court’s mediation program, or a private mediator, and when such a process would be useful; - The estimated trial length; and - Any 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, provided proof of termination was filed before the deadline using the appropriate electronic-filing event.

Extension and Adjournment Procedures

The court stated that requests to extend a deadline or adjourn a conference must be made through a letter-motion filed electronically at least 48 hours before the deadline or conference. The request must 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 date of the next court appearance. Unless the court notifies counsel otherwise, a scheduled conference will take place as planned.

Disposition and Significance

This is a case-management order following reassignment. Judge Clarke ordered the joint status letter and set procedures for extension or adjournment requests. The opinion does not reach the merits of the dispute and does not resolve any claim or defense.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.