Content v. Curran

Opinion

| USDC SDNY □ | | OCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY PUSS SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOK # □ [DATE rin TS □ CONTENT, [bene □ Plaintiffs

~ against - ORDER

oo 20 Civ, 5444 (PED)

CURRAN, ET Defendants. PAUL E, DAVISON, U.S.MU.: Plaintiff's “Motion for Reconsideration or to Certify for Interlocutory Appeal” [Dkts. 56- 57] is DENIED. Contrary to the premise of plaintiffs motion, the Court did not overlook “controlling authority.” As for certification for appeal under 28 U.S.C, § 1292(b), that procedure is “reserved for cases of unusual significance, those in which a ruling is of practical importance going well beyond run-of-the-mill concerns of parties before the Court.” Jn Re Auction Houses Antitrust Litigation, 164 F.Supp.2d 345, 248 (S.D.N.Y. 2001), This case in no way meets that standard,

The Court construcs defendant’s “Letter Motion for Leave to File Rule 54(b) cross- motion” [Dkt. 59] as a timely application for reconsideration, See Local Civil Rule 6.3. That application is GRANTED to the extent that the Court will review that portion of defendants’ underlying summary judgment motion “which sought a ruling of qualified immunity on plaintiff's excessive force claim.” [Dkt. 59, p. 1.] Defendants may file a brief confined to that issue by August £8, 2022. Plaintiff may file responsive papers by September 2, 2022. Any reply shall be filed by September 9, 2022, The conference previously scheduled for September 9 is ADJOURNED WITHOUT

DATE, The Clerk shall close Dkts, 56 and 59. Dated: August 4, 2022 White Plains, New York ee aT en / SO ORDERED NMA Paul EF. Davison, U.S.M.J.