Lavin v. Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc.
nyed · 1:21-cv-03070
Why this case is on jain.com
We follow this case because it names a company we track, although that company is not a party:
- CleanSpark: its name “CleanSpark, Inc.” appears in a filing in this case.
…..........................28 Bishins v. CleanSpark, Inc., No. 21 CV 511 (LAP), 2023 WL 112558 (S…
Parties
| Party | Role / type | Attorneys |
|---|---|---|
| Shiyang Huang | Objector | |
| Raymond Ochs | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Montgomery Brantley | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , |
| Maria Josephine Rosales | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , |
| Vipul Gupta | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , |
| Hesham Ibrahim | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Michael Moses | Defendant | , , , , |
| Chamath Palihapitiya | Defendant | , , , , , , , , |
| Richard Branson | Defendant | , , , , , , , , |
| Jennifer Ortiz | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Justin Carough | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Xinqiang Cui | Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Manuel Rodriguez | Movant, Plaintiff | , , , |
| Robert Scheele | Movant, Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Frank Matassa | Movant, Plaintiff | , , |
| Mark Kusnier | Mediator, Plaintiff | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Jon Campagna | Defendant | , , , , , , , , |
| Doug Ahrens | Defendant | , , , , , , , , |
| George Whitesides | Defendant | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Michael A. Colglazier | Defendant | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Shane Lavin | party | |
| Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. | party | |
| Richard O'Keefe-Jones | party |
Docket entries showing 20 of https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/?count=on&docket=59947015&page_size=40
#245 · 2026-10-02
(no description on the docket)
#244 · 2026-09-24
(no description on the docket)
#243 · 2026-09-04
(no description on the docket)
#242 · 2026-09-01
(no description on the docket)
#241 · 2026-09-01
(no description on the docket)
#240 · 2026-08-31
(no description on the docket)
#- · 2026-08-26
ORDER REFERRING MOTION: 212 MOTION for Settlement Final Approval and 214 MOTION for Attorney Fees. Motions are referred to Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. In the interest of an efficient resolution of this matter, the parties are encouraged to consider whether they will jointly consent to the jurisdiction of Judge Merkl for a final decision on these motions, rather than providing an R&R to this Court. Ordered by Judge Nina R. Morrison on 8/26/2026. (LA)
#- · 2026-06-23
RESCHEDULING ORDER: The final fairness hearing scheduled on 7/9/2026 at 10:00 a.m. is being adjourned by the Court due to a conflict in the Court's calendar. A final Fairness Hearing will now be held on 7/17/2026 at 12:00 p.m. in Courtroom 13D South before Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 6/23/2026. (KC)
#- · 2026-06-22
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of pro se objector Shiyang Huang's motion 223 to appear remotely at the fairness hearing scheduled for 7/9/2026. In light of Mr. Huang's representations about the nature of his objection, the motion is granted. Mr. Huang may appear by telephone at the fairness hearing scheduled for 7/9/2026 at 10:00 a.m. by calling call the dial-in number (571) 353-2301. The meeting ID is 362861721. The Court is in further receipt of of pro se objector Benjamin Wallace's notice of objection 211, which indicates that Mr. Wallace cannot attend the hearing in-person due to the cost
#- · 2026-05-07
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' motion 210 for leave to file a document, which encloses a public version of the motion for leave to file under seal, docketed at ECF 209. Plaintiffs' motion is granted; Plaintiffs need not re-file the document filed under seal at ECF 209 and refiled publicly at ECF 210 . Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 5/7/2026. (MJM)
#- · 2026-05-06
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' motion 209 for leave to file a document under seal, wherein Lead Counsel seeks permission to file its contemporaneous time and billing records via a chart setting forth expenses in the aggregate by category and detailed expenses/receipts for certain categories of costs (including expert, investigation, mediation, and transcript fees and individual travel expenses greater than $1,500). Lead Counsel seeks further permission to file these records ex parte, under seal. The motion is granted, on consent. See Darish v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et a
#- · 2026-03-12
SCHEDULING ORDER: A final fairness hearing will be held on 7/9/2026 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 13D South before Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. All papers in support of the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, and/or the Fee and Expense Application shall be filed and served by 5/27/2026. Any objections to the proposed settlement shall be filed and served on the appropriate parties by 6/9/2026, if feasible, or as soon as practicable thereafter. Any submissions filed in response to any objections or in further support of the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, and/or the Fee and Expense Applicat
#- · 2026-03-11
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The Court hereby adopts, in its entirety, the thorough and well-reasoned 205 Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable Taryn A. Merkl. It has been more than fourteen days since the filing of the R&R, and the parties have not filed objections. As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. See, e.g., Singh v. Anmol Food Mart, Inc., No. 22-CV-5475 (RER) (JAM), 2025 WL 611121, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 2
#- · 2026-03-02
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' counsel's motion to withdraw as attorney 206 . The motion is granted, given counsels representation that he no longer works for Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP, and that attorneys from the same firm will continue to represent Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Mr. Sulentic as counsel for Plaintiffs. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 3/2/2026. (MJM)
#- · 2026-02-27
ORDER finding as moot 131 Motion to Certify Class. In light of the 196 Motion for Settlement, the 131 Motion to Certify Class is denied as moot without prejudice to renew. Ordered by Judge Nina R. Morrison on 2/27/2026. (MM)
#- · 2026-01-13
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Nina R. Morrison for all further proceedings. Judge Allyne R. Ross no longer assigned to case. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Ordered by Chief Judge Margo K. Brodie on 1/13/2026. (ONF)
#- · 2026-01-12
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' notice of withdrawal of Natalie S. Pang as attorney 202 . In light of counsel's representation that Ms. Pang is no longer associated with the law firm Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, but that other counsel for the same firm will continue to represent Plaintiffs, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Ms. Pang as counsel of record for Plaintiffs. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 1/12/2026. (MJM)
#- · 2025-11-07
SCHEDULING ORDER: The Court is in receipt of the parties' motion for preliminary approval of the proposed class action settlement 196, which the Hon. Allyne R. Ross referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge on 11/6/2025. See 11/6/2025 ECF Order. A preliminary settlement hearing will be held on 1/5/2026 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 13D South before Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 11/7/2025. (KC)
#- · 2025-11-06
ORDER REFERRING MOTION: The 196 Motion for Preliminary Approval of Proposed Class Action Settlement is respectfully referred to Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl for a Report and Recommendation. Ordered by Judge Allyne R. Ross on 11/6/2025. (KCC)
#- · 2025-10-23
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of the parties' joint status report 195, representing that the parties are working towards finalizing the settlement agreement and related documents, but were not able to do so prior to the Court's 10/21/2025 deadline due to the need for input on the documents from multiple parties. See 7/22/2025 ECF Order. Given the inherent complexity of the case, the parties' request for a two-week extension to file a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement or a joint status report is granted nunc pro tunc. The parties shall file a motion for preliminary approval or