Kouadio v. BCPE Empire Topco, Inc.

S.D. New York

Kouadio v. BCPE Empire Topco, Inc.

DecidedAugust 29, 2024

Docket1:24-cv-05156

StatusUnknown

This text of Kouadio v. BCPE Empire Topco, Inc. (Kouadio v. BCPE Empire Topco, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kouadio v. BCPE Empire Topco, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

USONUITTEHDE RSTNA DTIESST RDIICSTT ROIFC TN ECWOU YROTR K ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : YAO FIDELE KOUADIO, : : Plaintiff, : : 24 Civ. 5156 (JPC) -v- : : ORDER BCPE EMPIRE TOPCO, INC., et al., : : Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

JOHN P. CRONAN, United States District Judge: Under the terms of the Court’s August 12, 2024, order at Docket Number 6, the parties were required to submit a joint letter to the Court by August 28, 2024, addressing the following in separate paragraphs: (1) A brief statement of the nature of the action and the principal defenses thereto; (2) A brief explanation of why jurisdiction1 and venue lie in this Court; (3) A brief description of all outstanding motions and/or all outstanding requests to file motions; (4) A brief description of any discovery that has already taken place, and that which will be necessary for the parties to engage in meaningful settlement negotiations; (5) A list of all prior settlement discussions, including the date, the parties involved, and the approximate duration of such discussions, if any; (6) The estimated length of trial; and (7) Any other information that the parties believe may assist this Court in resolving the action.

1 As Defendants invoke this Court’s diversity jurisdiction in their notice of removal, Dkt. 1 ¶ 1, and one Defendant appears to be a limited liability company, the parties are directed to address specifically whether the notice of removal sufficiently alleges the citizenship of that limited liability company. See Catskill Litig. Trust v. Park Place Entm’t Corp., 169 F. App’x 658, 659 (2d Cir. 2006) (“[T]he citizenship of a limited liability corporation is determined by reference to the citizenship of its members.”); accord Handelsman v. Bedford Village Associates Limited Partnership, 213 F.3d 48 (2d Cir. 2000). Dkt. 6 at 1-2. By that same date, the parties were also required to submit to the Court a proposed case management plan and scheduling order, a template of which is available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-john-p-cronan. /d. at 2. That deadline has passed, and the docket does not reflect the entry of such a joint letter. The Court sua sponte extends the deadline for the joint letter to August 30, 2024. If the parties have not filed a joint letter by that date, the Court will order the parties to appear for a status conference on this matter. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 29, 2024 Vie New York, New York JOHN P. CRONAN United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

USONUITTEHDE RSTNA DTIESST RDIICSTT ROIFC TN ECWOU YROTR K ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : YAO FIDELE KOUADIO, : : Plaintiff, : : 24 Civ. 5156 (JPC) -v- : : ORDER BCPE EMPIRE TOPCO, INC., et al., : : Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

JOHN P. CRONAN, United States District Judge: Under the terms of the Court’s August 12, 2024, order at Docket Number 6, the parties were required to submit a joint letter to the Court by August 28, 2024, addressing the following in separate paragraphs: (1) A brief statement of the nature of the action and the principal defenses thereto; (2) A brief explanation of why jurisdiction1 and venue lie in this Court; (3) A brief description of all outstanding motions and/or all outstanding requests to file motions; (4) A brief description of any discovery that has already taken place, and that which will be necessary for the parties to engage in meaningful settlement negotiations; (5) A list of all prior settlement discussions, including the date, the parties involved, and the approximate duration of such discussions, if any; (6) The estimated length of trial; and (7) Any other information that the parties believe may assist this Court in resolving the action.

1 As Defendants invoke this Court’s diversity jurisdiction in their notice of removal, Dkt. 1 ¶ 1, and one Defendant appears to be a limited liability company, the parties are directed to address specifically whether the notice of removal sufficiently alleges the citizenship of that limited liability company. See Catskill Litig. Trust v. Park Place Entm’t Corp., 169 F. App’x 658, 659 (2d Cir. 2006) (“[T]he citizenship of a limited liability corporation is determined by reference to the citizenship of its members.”); accord Handelsman v. Bedford Village Associates Limited Partnership, 213 F.3d 48 (2d Cir. 2000). Dkt. 6 at 1-2. By that same date, the parties were also required to submit to the Court a proposed case management plan and scheduling order, a template of which is available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-john-p-cronan. /d. at 2. That deadline has passed, and the docket does not reflect the entry of such a joint letter. The Court sua sponte extends the deadline for the joint letter to August 30, 2024. If the parties have not filed a joint letter by that date, the Court will order the parties to appear for a status conference on this matter. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 29, 2024 Vie New York, New York JOHN P. CRONAN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kouadio v. BCPE Empire Topco, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kouadio-v-bcpe-empire-topco-inc-nysd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack