Bernstein et al v. Cengage Learning, Inc.

Filing 114

MEMO ENDORSED ORDER granting 113 Motion for Extension of Time to File. ENDORSEMENT: The parties' letter-motion requesting an adjournment of the proposed Case Management Plan submission deadline ("Proposed CMP") (ECF No. 113) is GRAN TED. The parties shall submit the Proposed CMP by "the earlier of fourteen (14) days after a decision with respect to the R&R by Judge Carter, or November 10, 2021." The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close ECF No. 113. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 9/7/21) (yv)

Download PDF
Case 1:19-cv-07541-ALC-SLC Document 114 Filed 09/07/21 Page 1 of 2 NEW YORK SHANGHAI LONDON ATLANTA SINGAPORE BALTIMORE FIRM and AFFILIATE OFFICES PHILADELPHIA WILMINGTON CHICAGO MIAMI WASHINGTON, DC BOCA RATON SAN FRANCISCO PITTSBURGH JAMES F. RITTINGER DIRECT DIAL: +1 212 404 8770 PERSONAL FAX: +1 212 818 9606 E-MAIL: JFRittinger@duanemorris.com SILICON VALLEY SAN DIEGO LOS ANGELES TAIWAN BOSTON NEWARK LAS VEGAS CHERRY HILL LAKE TAHOE MYANMAR www.duanemorris.com HOUSTON AUSTIN ALLIANCES IN MEXICO HANOI AND SRI LANKA HO CHI MINH CITY September 3, 2021 VIA ECF The Honorable Sarah L. Cave Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl St. New York, NY 10007-1312 Re: Bernstein et al v. Cengage Learning, Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-07541-ALC-SLC Dear Magistrate Judge Cave: Defendant Cengage Learning, Inc. submits this letter motion to respectfully request, with the consent of Plaintiffs, the further adjournment of a deadline set in the Court’s Interim Scheduling Order (Dkt. 71) (the “Order”). In particular, the Order provided that, “[w]ithin fourteen (14) days of the undersigned’s decision on the Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint,” the parties shall “submit a proposed Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order” (the “CMP Submission Date”). Order at ¶ 5. Your Honor issued the decision contemplated by that Order on April 22, 2021 in the form of a Report and Recommendation to Judge Carter (the “R&R,” see Dkt. 95), which set the CMP Submission Date as May 6, 2021. Cengage filed an objection to the R&R before Judge Carter, and, at the request of the parties, Your Honor previously granted a first adjournment of the CMP Submission Date to the earlier of fourteen (14) days after a decision with respect to the R&R by Judge Carter, or July 9, 2021. See Dkt. 98 (May 7, 2021). On July 8, 2021, Your Honor granted a second adjournment of the CMP Submission Date to the earlier of fourteen (14) days after a decision with respect to the R&R by Judge Carter, or September 7, 2021. See Dkt. 110 (July 8, 2021). Judge Carter has not yet issued a decision on Cengage’s objection, and the parties have agreed to a proposed adjournment in a further effort to avoid a dispute while Judge Carter reviews Cengage’s objection. D UANE M ORRIS LLP 230 PARK AVENUE, SUITE 1130 NEW YORK, NY 10169-0079 PHONE: +1 212 818 9200 FAX: +1 212 818 9606 Case 1:19-cv-07541-ALC-SLC Document 114 Filed 09/07/21 Page 2 of 2 The Honorable Sarah L. Cave September 3, 2021 Page 2 The parties thus respectfully request an adjournment of the CMP Submission Date to the earlier of fourteen (14) days after a decision with respect to the R&R by Judge Carter, or November 10, 2021. In the event Judge Carter has not issued such a decision by November 10, 2021, both parties reserve all rights and arguments with respect to whether a case management plan and scheduling order is appropriate as of that date. Respectfully submitted, James F. Rittinger cc: All attorneys of record, via ECF The parties' letter-motion requesting an adjournment of the proposed Case Management Plan submission deadline ("Proposed CMP") (ECF No. 113) is GRANTED. The parties shall submit the Proposed CMP by "the earlier of fourteen (14) days after a decision with respect to the R&R by Judge Carter, or November 10, 2021." The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close ECF No. 113. SO ORDERED 9/7/2021

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.


Why Is My Information Online?