Recently, United States District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein accepted in part the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo. A detailed summary of Judge Figueredo’s decision was the subject of a prior post, available here.
As a threshold matter, Judge Hellerstein ruled that Judge Figueredo had the “authority to conduct an evidentiary hearing” and to make “recommendations on findings of fact,” because “the hearing was a pretrial proceeding” and “a Rule 56 motion is appropriate for referral to a magistrate judge.” Judge Hellerstein also found Judge Figueredo’s findings of fact to be “appropriate.”
However, Judge Hellerstein granted Plaintiffs “leave to re-open the record, testify themselves if they wish to do so, add any other information, and elicit any other testimony, relevant to the issue” of inequitable conduct at an evidentiary hearing. Judge Hellerstein stated, “[p]rovisionally, I agree with the Report’s recommendation that the entire period of delay was not unintentional.” Nevertheless, “since there will be an evidentiary hearing, I defer making final findings and conclusions until after the scheduled hearing.”
The evidentiary hearing on Google’s affirmative defense of inequitable conduct was scheduled to commence on February 2, 2026, with a final decision from Judge Hellerstein to follow.
The case is Weisner v. Google LLC, Case No. 20 Civ. 2862 (AKH) (VF) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2026)
