Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Copyright | New York Southern
Order
OPINION AND ORDER re: 44 FIRST MOTION to Serve Defendant TARIK JOHNSTON by alternate means filed by Nadim Nimai Kesten; 30 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer addressed to Judge Lewis J. Liman from Cynthia S. A rato dated January 8, 2021, filed by Orchard Enterprises NY, Inc. Plaintiff has not identified any case to the contrary. Thus, because Plaintiff has made no showing that the email address identified is reasonably likely to apprise Johnston of the action, it is not sufficient for Plaintiff to also state that he will make service through Facebook and Instagram. Finally, Plaintiff requests an extension of time in which to effect service. Plaintiff's deadline to effect service exp ired on February 16, 2021. Plaintiff made his motion before that date and has shown good cause for not being able to effect service within that time period and has moved timely to effect service by alternate means. The Court will grant Plaintiff a 30-day extension from the date of this Order -to April 2, 2012 to effect service. See D.R.I., 2004 WL 1237511, at *2. SO ORDERED. ( Service due by 4/2/2021.) (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 3/3/2021) (va)
Copyright | New York Southern
Scheduling Order
CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: All parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a United States Magistrate Judge, including motions and trial. Any motion to amend or to join additional parties shall be filed no later than 5/12/2021. Fact Discovery due by 8/11/2021. Depositions shall be completed by 8/11/2021. Expert Discovery due by 9/27/2021. Deposition due by 9/27/2021. Discovery due by 9/27/2021. Motions due by 9/22/2021. This case is to be tried to a jury. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 2/22/2021) (va)
Copyright | New York Southern
Order
ORDER: Plaintiff has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal as to Defendant ASCAP Enterprises A/K/A American Society of Composures, Authors and Publishers pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. Dkt. No. 33. Rule 41 addresses dismissa l of actions rather than dismissal of parties. Treating the application as addressed to the Court's power under Rule 15 or Rule 21 or its inherent power, the Court hereby GRANTS dismissal of all claims as against Defendant ASCAP without p rejudice and with each party to bear their own costs and fees. See Kerr v. Compagnie de Ultramar, 250 F.2d 860, 864 (2d Cir. 1958); Harvey Aluminum, Inc. v. Ican Cyanamid Co., 203 F.2d 105, 108 (2d Cir. 1953), cert. denied, 345 U.S. 964. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Defendant ASCAP. SO ORDERED. ASCAP Enterprises LLC terminated. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 20-8909) (va)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login