While the pandemic was winding down, European countries received substantial funds from the E.U. government to address the increasing economic distress caused by the lockdown period. Consequently, the former Italian government devised an ambitious plan that regards civil justice reform as a strategic tool for gradually obtaining financial resources from the E.U. The approved reform encompasses various aspects, including the renewed framework of the civil proceeding and specific attention to A.D.R., like negotiation or mediation. Considering the core elements of this recent reform, one might question whether the new Italian civil proceeding resembles fundamental aspects of the U.S. civil process, despite historical divergences stemming from the inquisitorial and adversarial models of justice. This notion delineates the basis of the article’s title, which seeks to explore a two-fold comparison. Firstly, the article aims to elucidate how several key elements of the reform in civil proceedings mirror certain foundational aspects and cornerstones of the U.S. pretrial phase, as provided at Federal Level. It endeavors to provide a technical explanation of this comparison, while carefully emphasizing that it does not entail a mere formal transplantation of rules, but rather a shared commonality in the framework and available decision-making tools (such as summary judgment, motion to dismiss, and judicially-led settlement). To this effect, a new semi-global model of civil justice is emerging spontaneously. Secondly, the article aspires to undertake a broader comparative analysis, capitalizing on the growing criticism of the U.S. civil justice system. It intends to caution both systems to improve their future interpretation and application of their rules.