Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 2, 2023

True Return Systems, LLC v. MakerDAO

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-08478
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In True Return Systems v. MakerDAO, Judge Broderick vacated MakerDAO’s default certificate and set briefing deadlines while the case proceeds.

Who this affects

MakerDAO’s Certificate of Default was vacated. Both parties received deadlines for upcoming filings, and the existing case-management schedule was placed on hold.

What happened

True Return Systems, LLC sued MakerDAO. After a telephone conference, the court considered whether to keep a Certificate of Default entered against MakerDAO. MakerDAO’s lawyer had appeared, the case was still in its early stages, and MakerDAO agreed to waive service.

The court vacated the Certificate of Default and directed the Clerk to terminate the open motion at Doc. 26. The court also ordered MakerDAO to tell the court by October 6, 2023, whether it would provide substantive responses to True Return Systems’ disclosure requests under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.

Judge Broderick set deadlines for MakerDAO’s motion to dismiss and for True Return Systems’ motion concerning recovery of costs. The court held the case-management and scheduling order in abeyance because of the upcoming motions. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
True Return Systems, LLC v. MakerDAO · No. 1:22-cv-08478
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 2, 2023

Background

The court held a telephone conference in the action. A Certificate of Default had been entered at Doc. 25. MakerDAO’s counsel appeared in the case, MakerDAO agreed to waive service, and the litigation was still in its early stages.

Ruling on Default

The court vacated the Certificate of Default. It found that doing so was appropriate because of counsel’s appearance, the early stage of the litigation, and MakerDAO’s agreement to waive service. The court also relied on the Second Circuit’s strong preference for resolving disputes on their merits and the principle that doubts about vacating a default should be resolved in favor of the defaulting party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the open motion at Doc. 26.

Further Proceedings

The court ordered MakerDAO to file a letter by October 6, 2023, stating whether it would submit substantive responses to True Return Systems’ disclosure requests under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. MakerDAO’s opening brief supporting its motion to dismiss was due November 6, 2023; True Return Systems’ opposition was due December 6, 2023; and MakerDAO’s reply was due December 20, 2023.

True Return Systems’ motion and opening brief concerning recoupment of costs were also due November 6, 2023. MakerDAO’s opposition was due December 6, 2023, and True Return Systems’ reply was due December 20, 2023. The Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order was held in abeyance because of the future motions. This order did not decide the merits of the parties’ underlying claims.

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.