From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schansman v. Sberbank of Russ. Pjsc

United States District Court, S.D. New York
May 26, 2022
19 Civ. 2985 (ALC)(GWG) (S.D.N.Y. May. 26, 2022)

Opinion

19 Civ. 2985 (ALC)(GWG)

05-26-2022

THOMAS SCHANSMAN et al., Plaintiffs, v. SBERBANK OF RUSSIA PJSC et al., Defendants.


ORDER

GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Sberbank of Russia PJSC need not respond to Docket # 335 inasmuch as the Court grants the request for formal briefing. Sberbank shall respond to Docket # 336 by May 31, 2022, without prejudice to any extension request compliant with Paragraph 1.E of the Court's Individual Practices. The Court notes that it has held off scheduling argument on the motion for a stay given the longstanding assertion by counsel for Sberbank that it is on the brink of moving to withdraw. Sberbank's response should address in detail the timing of the expected motion to withdraw in the event it is raised in their response to Docket #336. In making that response, Sberbank is reminded that there is no stay pending the disposition of the motion for a stay.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Schansman v. Sberbank of Russ. Pjsc

United States District Court, S.D. New York
May 26, 2022
19 Civ. 2985 (ALC)(GWG) (S.D.N.Y. May. 26, 2022)
Case details for

Schansman v. Sberbank of Russ. Pjsc

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS SCHANSMAN et al., Plaintiffs, v. SBERBANK OF RUSSIA PJSC et al.…

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

Date published: May 26, 2022

Citations

19 Civ. 2985 (ALC)(GWG) (S.D.N.Y. May. 26, 2022)