April 13, 2018 |
Filing
489
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER......Bloombergs request for a curative jury instruction is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 4/13/2018) (gr)
|
March 23, 2018 |
Filing
434
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER......Defendants March 20, 2018 motion to decertify plaintiffs state-law claims is denied as untimely and on the merits. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 3/22/2018) (gr)
|
November 7, 2017 |
Filing
335
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER......Bloombergs October 11 motion for stay pending appeal is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 11/7/2017) (gr)
|
September 27, 2017 |
Filing
310
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER.....The defendants September 15, 2016 motion for summary judgment is granted. The NYLL claims brought by Roseman are dismissed with prejudice. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 9/27/2017) (gr)
|
September 25, 2017 |
Filing
308
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: On September 21, 2017, this Court issued an Opinion (September 21 Opinion) granting the plaintiffs motion to certify a class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 in connection with the claim brought by Bloombergs New York-base d Analytics Representatives for a violation of New York Labor Law § 650 et seq. (NYLL). On August 19, 2016, the plaintiffs also moved to certify the following California class: all representatives in the Analytics Department in California who w ere not paid time and one-half for hours over 40 worked in one or more weeks or hours over 8 worked in one or more days at any time within the four years preceding the filing of this Complaint and the date of final judgment in this matter. It is und isputed that over 100 current and former Bloomberg employees are putative members of this California class. For the reasons that follow, and for the reasons set forth in the September 21 Opinion, the plaintiffs motion is granted.... (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 9/25/2017) (gr)
|
September 21, 2017 |
Filing
307
OPINION AND ORDER......The plaintiffs August 19, 2016 motion for certification of a NYLL class for Analytics Representatives is granted. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 9/21/2017) (gr)
|
April 4, 2017 |
Filing
290
OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons discussed above, the Court denies Bloomberg's motions to dismiss at this time. However, plaintiffs Edward DaCosta, Catherine Fox, and Joseph Marfil shall respond to Bloomberg's document requests and shall file affidavits with the Court signaling their intent to remain in this litigation no later than May 19, 2017. Failure to comply with this order shall result in dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (b). This Opinion and Order resolves Docket Numbers 152 and 169. SO ORDERED. re: 169 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Bloomberg, L.P. 152 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Bloomberg, L.P. (Signed by Judge Thomas P. Griesa on 4/4/2017) (rjm)
|
November 14, 2016 |
Filing
245
OPINION & ORDER: On October 28, 2016, plaintiffs filed a letter-motion ("Motion for Leave") asking for leave to file a Supplemental Statement of Undisputed Facts and a Supplemental Declaration of Michael Russo in connection with their pending Motion for SJ. Defendant filed its opposition to plaintiffs' Motion for Leave on November 4, 2016. For the reasons discussed below, plaintiffs' Motion for Leave is denied. The Court therefore denies plaintiffs' request for leave to file a Supplemental Statement of Material Facts and a Supplemental Declaration of Michael Russo. To the extent that plaintiffs feel it necessary to rebut defendant's argument, which was raised in defendant's opposition to plaintif fs' motion for class certification, plaintiffs should do so in their reply papers in connection with that pending motion. The Court expresses no opinion as to what plaintiffs may or may not include in their reply papers in connection with their motion for partial summary judgment. (As further set forth in this Opinion) (Signed by Judge Thomas P. Griesa on 11/14/2016) (kl)
|
May 18, 2015 |
Filing
44
OPINION & ORDER #105518 re: 38 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 37 Memorandum & Opinion, and to Amend the Case Caption, filed by Bloomberg, L.P. Defendants' motion is granted. The court rules as follows: The proposed notice shall be modified to include plaintiffs full name, as set forth in Dkt. No. 40-1; The proposed consent form shall be modified to remove the prior case caption; and Plaintiffs request for equitable tolling is denied. The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption in this case to read: "ERIC MICHAEL ROSEMAN, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. BLOOMBERG L.P., Defendant." The Clerk of Court is also directed to terminate the motion listed as item 38 on the docket. (Signed by Judge Thomas P. Griesa on 5/18/2015) (kko) Modified on 5/19/2015 (soh).
|
April 17, 2015 |
Filing
37
OPINION: The court (1) conditionally certifies this action as a collective action pursuant to § 216(b) of the FLSA, (2) authorizes the issuance of plaintiff's proposed notice to potential opt-in plaintiffs, and (3) orders defendants to provide the requested information-with the exception of social security numbers, dates of birth, and telephone numbers-for all persons employed by Bloomberg within 3 years preceding the date that the collective action notice is issued. Plaintiff may send the notice by email and may distribute a reminder notice before the end of the opt-in period, but Bloomberg need not post the notice in the workplace. This opinion resolves the motion listed as item 8 on the docket. (Signed by Judge Thomas P. Griesa on 4/17/2015) (kl)
|
February 11, 2015 |
Filing
30
OPINION re: 8 MOTION to Approve Collective Action Notice filed by Eric Michael, 11 MOTION for Protective Order Notice of Motion filed by Eric Michael. The court denies plaintiff's motion for a protective ord er and leave to proceed pseudonymously. Plaintiff is directed to file a second amended complaint identifying the plaintiff by name within 30 days of the date of this opinion. The second amended complaint shall otherwise be identical to the first amen ded complaint. Should plaintiff not file a second amended complaint identifying plaintiff by name before this deadline, the court will dismiss the FAC without prejudice. This opinion resolves item 11 on the docket. SO ORDERED. (See Opinion.) (Signed by Judge Thomas P. Griesa on 2/11/2015) (ajs)
|