Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1

S.D. New York

Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1

DecidedApril 15, 2021

Docket1:18-cv-07380

StatusUnknown

This text of Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1 (Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------x : PEARSON EDUCATION INC., et al., : Plaintiffs, : No. 18-CV-7380 (PGG) (OTW) : -against- : ORDER : DOE 1 D/B/A ANYTHING YOU CAN IMAGINE, et : al., : : Defendants. : -------------------------------------------------------------x ONA T. WANG, United States Magistrate Judge: This matter has been referred to me for Inquest After Default. (ECF 239). By May 27, 2021, Plaintiffs shall serve on Defendants and file an inquest memorandum setting forth proof of damages. Plaintiffs shall also serve a copy of this Order on Defendants by April 22, 2021 and file an affidavit of service on the docket. Plaintiffs’ proposed findings of fact and law should specifically tie the proposed damages figure to the legal claim(s) on which liability has been established. Further, Plaintiffs’ proposed damages figures should be supported by documentary evidence and/or one or more affidavits by an individual with personal knowledge establishing the proposed figures. See RGI Brands LLC v. Cognac Brisset-Aurige, S.A.R.L., No. 12-CV-1369 (LGS) (AJP), 2013 WL 1668206, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2013) (noting burden on plaintiff to establish damages amount with “reasonable certainty”). Plaintiffs must also include documentation, including contemporaneous time records, supporting any requested attorney’s fees and costs. Defendants’ opposition papers shall be filed by June 10, 2021.

The Court hereby notifies the parties that it may conduct this inquest solely on the written submissions of the parties. See Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., Inc., 951 F.2d 504, 508 (2d Cir. 1991). If any party seeks an evidentiary hearing on damages, such party must include the request in its papers, as well as provide reasons why a hearing is necessary and detail what types of additional evidence would be presented at the hearing.

SO ORDERED.

s/ Ona T. Wang Dated: April 15, 2021 Ona T. Wang New York, New York United States Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------x : PEARSON EDUCATION INC., et al., : Plaintiffs, : No. 18-CV-7380 (PGG) (OTW) : -against- : ORDER : DOE 1 D/B/A ANYTHING YOU CAN IMAGINE, et : al., : : Defendants. : -------------------------------------------------------------x ONA T. WANG, United States Magistrate Judge: This matter has been referred to me for Inquest After Default. (ECF 239). By May 27, 2021, Plaintiffs shall serve on Defendants and file an inquest memorandum setting forth proof of damages. Plaintiffs shall also serve a copy of this Order on Defendants by April 22, 2021 and file an affidavit of service on the docket. Plaintiffs’ proposed findings of fact and law should specifically tie the proposed damages figure to the legal claim(s) on which liability has been established. Further, Plaintiffs’ proposed damages figures should be supported by documentary evidence and/or one or more affidavits by an individual with personal knowledge establishing the proposed figures. See RGI Brands LLC v. Cognac Brisset-Aurige, S.A.R.L., No. 12-CV-1369 (LGS) (AJP), 2013 WL 1668206, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2013) (noting burden on plaintiff to establish damages amount with “reasonable certainty”). Plaintiffs must also include documentation, including contemporaneous time records, supporting any requested attorney’s fees and costs. Defendants’ opposition papers shall be filed by June 10, 2021.

The Court hereby notifies the parties that it may conduct this inquest solely on the written submissions of the parties. See Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., Inc., 951 F.2d 504, 508 (2d Cir. 1991). If any party seeks an evidentiary hearing on damages, such party must include the request in its papers, as well as provide reasons why a hearing is necessary and detail what types of additional evidence would be presented at the hearing.

SO ORDERED.

s/ Ona T. Wang Dated: April 15, 2021 Ona T. Wang New York, New York United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearson-education-inc-v-doe-1-nysd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack