Yu v. City of New York et al
| Laurene Yu |
| City of New York, Administration for Children Services (ACS) and John Doe |
| 1:2017cv07327 |
| September 25, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Robert W. Sweet |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
82
ORDER: Defendant's Letter Request for a sur-reply is granted. No additional filings will be permitted on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint filed on July 31, 2020. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff and note that mailing on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 9/24/2020) (ks) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER denying 63 LETTER MOTION to Stay Discovery. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that if Plaintiff intends to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff shall do so by August 1, 2020. Plaintiff is hereby advised that any amended complaint will comp letely replace the original complaint. Accordingly, if Plaintiff files an amended complaint, it should include all of the information Plaintiff believes is necessary to make a short, plain statement explaining why she is entitled to relief against each defendant. Plaintiff is on notice that declining to amend her pleadings to timely respond to a fully briefed argument in the Defendants' June 15, 2020 motion to dismiss may well constitute a waiver of the Plaintiffs right to use the amen dment process to cure any defects that have been made apparent by the Defendants' briefing. See Loreley Fin. (Jersey) No. 3 Ltd. v. Wells Fargo Sec., LLC., 797 F.3d 160, 190 (2d Cir. 2015) (leaving "unaltered the grounds on which denia l of leave to amend has long been held proper, such as undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, and futility."). If Plaintiff chooses to amend, Defendants may then (a) file an answer; (b) file a new motion to dismiss; or (c) submit a letter s tating that they intend to rely on the initially-filed motion to dismiss. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if no amended complaint is filed, Plaintiff shall serve her opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss by August 1, 2020. Defendants' reply, if any, shall be served by August 15, 2020. Either party may request an extension of the briefing schedule for the motion. A deadline will be extended if the party demonstrates that its pursuit of the action has been diligent and that t here is a good reason for extending the deadline. Defendants' request to stay all discovery in this matter pending resolution of the motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 63, is denied as premature, as no Rule 26 conference has been held and no sche duling order has yet been entered. Nonetheless, no discovery shall proceed until the motion to dismiss is resolved. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and that mailing will be noted on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 6/22/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER: In the event the case has not been settled, plaintiff shall file her Amended Complaint, in accordance with Yu v. City of New York, No. 18-3838 (2d Cir. Feb. 3, 2020), no later than June 1, 2020. (As further set forth in this Order.) ( Amended Pleadings due by 6/1/2020.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 4/1/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER: In light of the ongoing national public health emergency, the initial case management conference scheduled for April 1, 2020, at 11:00 a.m., will be conducted telephonically. At that time, the parties shall call into the below teleconference: Call in number: 888-557-8511 Access Code: 7746387. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the plaintiff. SO ORDERED., ( Telephone Conference set for 4/1/2020 at 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 3/19/2020) (ama) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
36
OPINION re: 21 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint filed by Administration for Children Services (ACS), City of New York. Under the authorities and conclusions set forth above, the Defendants' motion to dismiss the Complaint is granted in its entirety. Plaintiff's claims under federal law and NYSHRL are dismissed with prejudice, while Plaintiff's NYCHRL and defamation claims are dismissed without prejudice to re-file in state court. It is so ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 11/29/2018) (anc) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
