International Business Machines Corporation v. Kede de Freitas Lima
Filing
45
ORDER: The Temporary Restraining Order entered on June 19, 2020 (Doc. 20), as extended by the Court's Orders on July 6, 2020 and July 13, 2020, is extended nunc pro tunc as of the close of business yesterday July 22, 2020 pending the hearin g and determination of plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. The Court finds that good cause exists to extend the Order because the hearing on the application for a preliminary injunction has not concluded and is continued to July 28, 2020; and the Court will need additional time to consider the voluminous record created and decide the motion. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 7/23/2020) (ks)
Case 7:20-cv-04573-PMH-PED Document 45 Filed 07/23/20 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------X
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
MACHINES CORPORATION,
ORDER
7:20-cv-04573 (PMH)
Plaintiff,
v.
RODRIGO KEDE DE FREITAS
LIMA,
Defendant.
---------------------------------------------------------X
PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge:
The Temporary Restraining Order entered on June 19, 2020 (Doc. 20), as extended by the Court’s
Orders on July 6, 2020 and July 13, 2020, is extended nunc pro tunc as of the close of business
yesterday July 22, 2020 pending the hearing and determination of plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary
injunction.
The Court finds that good cause exists to extend the Order because the hearing on the application
for a preliminary injunction has not concluded and is continued to July 28, 2020; and the Court will
need additional time to consider the voluminous record created and decide the motion.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York
July 23, 2020
__________________________________
PHILIP M. HALPERN
United States District Judge
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?