Marciano v. NBCUniversal Media LLC
- Ho
- 1:23-cv-08127
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Marciano v. NBCUniversal Media, Judge Ho reassigned the case and set an initial pretrial conference and filing requirements.
The parties and their counsel, including counsel who had appeared and any parties or counsel who had not yet appeared.
What happened
Marciano v. NBCUniversal Media LLC was reassigned to United States District Judge Dale E. Ho. The order does not describe the underlying dispute or decide any claims.
Judge Ho directed the parties’ lawyers to follow his court practices and said existing orders, dates, and deadlines would remain in effect unless changed. He scheduled an initial pretrial conference for December 7, 2023, and required the parties to file a joint letter and proposed case-management schedule by November 30, 2023.
Judge Ho also required the lawyers to discuss settlement, discovery, alternative dispute resolution, jurisdiction, venue, deadlines, and other case issues before the conference. The order further addressed requests to extend deadlines and service on parties whose lawyers had not appeared.
The detailed version
- Marciano v. NBCUniversal Media LLC · No. 1:23-cv-08127
- Ho
- Oct. 24, 2023
Nature of the Order
This notice states that the case was reassigned to Judge Dale E. Ho. It is a case-management order and does not decide the merits of the dispute or any motion.
Court’s Directions
The court directed all counsel to become familiar with Judge Ho’s Individual Practices. Unless the court later orders otherwise, all prior orders, dates, and deadlines remain in effect.
The court scheduled an initial pretrial conference for December 7, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., to be held through Microsoft Teams. The parties may address open legal issues at that conference.
Before the conference, counsel must confer about settlement and the subjects covered by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, which governs pretrial case management. By November 30, 2023, the parties must file a joint letter and a proposed Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order. The joint letter must address the nature of the action, principal defenses, important legal and factual issues, jurisdiction and venue, existing deadlines, outstanding motions, discovery, prior settlement discussions, alternative dispute resolution, and any other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.
The order also provides procedures for requesting an extension or adjournment. A request must be made by letter-motion filed on the court’s electronic filing system at least two business days before the relevant deadline or conference and must include specified information about prior requests, the other side’s position, and the next scheduled appearance.
Counsel who had appeared by the date of the order must promptly serve the order and the court’s Individual Practices on counsel who had not appeared, or personally on the party if counsel’s identity is unknown, and must file proof of that notice.
Disposition
The court ordered the case-management steps described above. The opinion does not state any disposition of claims or motions.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.