From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wood v. Mike Bloomberg 2020, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Dec 16, 2021
20 Civ. 2489 (LTS) (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2021)

Opinion

20 Civ. 2489 (LTS) (GWG)

12-16-2021

DONNA WOOD Plaintiffs, v. MIKE BLOOMBERG 2020, INC. Defendant.


ORDER

GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

With regard to Docket # 205 and the defendant's proposed changes to the notice as submitted by plaintiffs, the Court believes the notice should be as clear as possible, should accurately convey its purpose, and should be free of superfluous material. With these principles in mind, the Court rules as follows:

Court Authorization:

The plaintiffs' proposed language should remain.

Information Regarding Other Claims.

The plaintiffs' proposed language should remain on page 1. Question 10, however, should be deleted as it is superfluous and distracting.

Summary Table of Legal Options.

The plaintiffs' proposed table should remain.

Failure to Submit Timely Form.

The defendant's proposed change is accepted.

Statute of Limitations.

The defendant's proposed change is accepted.

Contact Information for Defendant's Counsel.

The defendant gives no explanation as to why a potential opt-in would need to contact defendant's counsel. Accordingly, its counsel's contact information should not be included.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Wood v. Mike Bloomberg 2020, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Dec 16, 2021
20 Civ. 2489 (LTS) (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2021)
Case details for

Wood v. Mike Bloomberg 2020, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DONNA WOOD Plaintiffs, v. MIKE BLOOMBERG 2020, INC. Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Dec 16, 2021

Citations

20 Civ. 2489 (LTS) (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2021)