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)
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?