Wood v. Mike Bloomberg 2020, Inc., No. 1:2020cv02489 - Document 203 (S.D.N.Y. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER: Chief Judge Swain will rule on the motion contained in Docket # 200. The Court notes, however, that there is no stay in effect of the Court's Opinion and Order (Docket # 148), see Shim-Larkin v. City of New York, 2019 WL 4688703, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2019) (filing of objections under Rule 72 does not operate as a stay); Am. Rock Salt Co., LLC v. Norfolk S. Corp., 371 F. Supp. 2d 358, 360-61 (W.D.N.Y. 2005) (same), and thus nothing prevents or has prevented the notices from being sent. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 11/24/2021) (jca)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Wood v. Mike Bloomberg 2020, Inc. Doc. 203 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------X DONNA WOOD : : ORDER : 20 Civ. 2489 (LTS) (GWG) Plaintiffs, -v.: MIKE BLOOMBERG 2020, INC. : Defendants. : ---------------------------------------------------------------X GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, United States Magistrate Judge Chief Judge Swain will rule on the motion contained in Docket # 200. The Court notes, however, that there is no stay in effect of the Court’s Opinion and Order (Docket # 148), see Shim-Larkin v. City of New York, 2019 WL 4688703, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2019) (filing of objections under Rule 72 does not operate as a stay); Am. Rock Salt Co., LLC v. Norfolk S. Corp., 371 F. Supp. 2d 358, 360-61 (W.D.N.Y. 2005) (same), and thus nothing prevents or has prevented the notices from being sent. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 24, 2021 New York, New York Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
