From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Minden Pictures, Inc. v. Gizmodo Media Grp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Oct 19, 2020
20 Civ. 2116 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2020)

Opinion

20 Civ. 2116 (LGS)

10-19-2020

MINDEN PICTURES, INC., Plaintiff, v. GIZMODO MEDIA GROUP LLC, Defendant.


ORDER

:

WHEREAS, on October 5, 2020, the Court issued an Order denying Defendant's motion to stay pending resolution of Defendant's motion to dismiss and denying Defendant's request that the Court order Plaintiff to post a security bond. Dkt. No. 49.

WHEREAS, on October 12, 2020, Defendant filed a request for reconsideration of the Court's decision to deny a stay of discovery pending resolution of Defendant's motion to dismiss. Dkt. No. 52.

WHEREAS, "[a] motion for reconsideration should be granted only when the [party seeking reconsideration] identifies an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice." Kolel Beth Yechiel Mechil of Tartikov, Inc. v. YLL Irrevocable Tr., 729 F.3d 99, 104 (2d Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted). The standard "is strict, and reconsideration will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked." Analytical Surveys, Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P., 684 F.3d 36, 52 (2d Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). A motion for reconsideration is "not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). The decision to grant or deny a motion for reconsideration rests within "the sound discretion of the district court." See Aczel v. Labonia, 584 F.3d 52, 61 (2d Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted); accord Strougo v. Barclays PLC, 334 F. Supp. 3d 591, 595 (S.D.N.Y. 2018). It is hereby

ORDERED that, Defendant's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Defendant has not identified "an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice." Kolel Beth Yechiel Mechil of Tartikov, 729 F.3d at 104. Dated: October 19, 2020

New York, New York

/s/ _________

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Minden Pictures, Inc. v. Gizmodo Media Grp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Oct 19, 2020
20 Civ. 2116 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2020)
Case details for

Minden Pictures, Inc. v. Gizmodo Media Grp.

Case Details

Full title:MINDEN PICTURES, INC., Plaintiff, v. GIZMODO MEDIA GROUP LLC, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Oct 19, 2020

Citations

20 Civ. 2116 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2020)