The powerful REIT plans to create what a source called a “cohesive street-level experience” on both sides of Seventh Avenue between West 33rd and 34th streets, replacing what Vornado chairman Steve Roth recently called “junky retail.”

Vornado quietly bought up one parcel after another on the nondescript but heavily-trafficked block over the past few years. The next step, our sources said, will be demolishing the unattractive small buildings on the east side, to be followed by those on the west side. The few existing tenants are all on short-term leases.

One Penn Plaza Bloomberg via Getty Images

Roth tapped a crack leasing team headed by Newmark’s global retail chairman Mark Masinter to “repopulate,” as our source put it, the old stores with merchants appropriate for the reborn district anchored by Penn Station and Madison Square Garden. Vornado spent $2.5 billion to redevelop old office towers, launch the dining and shopping options inside the Moynihan Train Hall, and install a popular  public plaza on West 33rd Street between Seventh and Eighth avenues.

The Newmark leasing team also includes Karen Bellantoni, Jackie Totolo, Pierce Thomspon and Nick Masinter.

The district is now home to more than 5 million square feet of prime office space, 300,000 square feet of public plazas and scores of eating and drinking venues, including huge new Avra inside the Moynihan building and Blue Ribbon Steak & Sushi. Vornado is also landlord to Primark, the international clothing merchant opening its US flagship at 150 W. 34th St.

The new Seventh Avenue storefronts — to be installed inside three-level “retail boxes” — will aim to sign actual stores, not restaurants or fast-food operations. Demolition of old structures is to start later this year with completion of the new spaces targeted for 2027.

Roth tipped the plan, although without details, in Vornado’s third-quarter earnings call in November. He pledged to replace  “junky” retail on the avenue and to lead revitalization of the busy but “deteriorated” 34th Street/Seventh Avenue subway station.

Vornado chairman Steve Roth Bloomberg via Getty Images

Vornado EVP and co-head of real estate Glen Weiss said his company’s “transformative work is evident  across all corners of the neighborhood. With Newmark, we will make the Penn District retail environment New York’s next big event.”

An even bigger event will be a new skyscraper  to rise on the former Hotel Pennsylvania site. Vornado’s mum on plans but Roth told investors last fall he was in talks with a major tenant to anchor a 1,000 foot-tall tower.

The Big Apple’s retail world lost a true giant with the passing of C. Bradley Mendelson last week. “Brad,” as all knew him, was one of the premier dealmakers at CBRE, Cushman & Wakefield and Colliers International for over four decades.

C. Bradley Mendelson Cushman & Wakefield

Mendelson was a prime mover behind such epochal deals as the opening of Toys ‘R’ Us in Times Square — then the world’s largest toy store — and for bringing a trio of spectacular tenants to  the former 666 Fifth Ave. Landlords and tenants valued his professionalism;  journalists appreciated the inside knowledge he generously, and often amusingly, shared; his colleagues loved the homemade cookies he brought to the office every week.

 A man beloved for many reasons — and for all seasons.

The weekend opening of Milk & Honey cafe at LCOR’s 1515 Surf Ave. was the icing on the cake for the twin-towered project overlooking the Coney Island Boardwalk.

It’s Brooklyn’s third Milk & Honey, the casual eatery with locations in Ditmas Park and Bay Ridge. “It’s the perfect setting for us, right by the beach in a building that’s redefining modern living in Coney Island,” said eatery owner Yasser “Max” Habib.

Milk & Honey cafe on Surf Avenue in Brooklyn. milkandhoneycafebk/Instagram

The rental building is part of a residential development boom along Surf Avenue, which is unrecognizably transformed from what it was just 10 years ago.

The project’s 463 apartments  are 75% leased, including 139 affordable units that are 100% leased.

The post PENN District poised to grow by another block, replacing ‘junky retail;’ NYC loses retail giant appeared first on Our Story Insight.

The justices took up Bayer’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling in a case brought by a man who said he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of exposure to Roundup. The Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a $1.25 million verdict that a St. Louis jury awarded the plaintiff, John Durnell, over his cancer diagnosis.

Bayer shares jumped almost 5% on the news that the court would hear the case. The court has yet to announce when it will hear arguments in the dispute.

The justices took up Bayer’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling in a case brought by a man who said he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of exposure to Roundup. AP

In a statement, Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said the court’s decision was “an important step in our multi-pronged strategy to significantly contain this litigation.”

“It is time for the US legal system to establish that companies should not be punished under state laws for complying with federal warning label requirements,” Anderson said.

An attorney for the plaintiff did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Missouri Court of Appeals rejected the German pharmaceutical and biotechnology company’s contention that federal law governing pesticides bars lawsuits making claims over pesticides under state laws.

Bayer is facing similar claims from approximately 65,000 plaintiffs in state and federal courts. Roundup is among the most widely used weedkillers in the United States.

Bayer shares jumped almost 5% on the news that the court would hear the case. Bayer is facing similar claims from approximately 65,000 plaintiffs in state and federal courts. REUTERS

President  Trump’s administration in December urged the Supreme Court to take up Bayer’s appeal. In a brief filed at the court, US Solicitor General D. John Sauer offered the administration’s view that Bayer is correct in its reading of the law at issue.

Bayer is arguing that consumers should not be able to sue it under state law for failing to warn that Roundup increases cancer risk because the Environmental Protection Agency has found no such risk and requires no such warning. Bayer argued that federal law does not allow it to add any warning to the product beyond the EPA-approved label.

President  rump’s administration in December urged the Supreme Court to take up Bayer’s appeal. AP

The company has made the Supreme Court a key part of its strategy to manage the claims, as a ruling that federal law preempts claims brought under state law would shut down the vast majority of the lawsuits.

Lawyers for Durnell had asked the Supreme Court to turn away Bayer’s appeal. They said Durnell relied on Bayer’s advertising and not just the label when he chose to use Roundup, and the company’s marketing failed to warn consumers of the product’s risks.

Start your day with all you need to know

Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more.

Thanks for signing up!

The company has paid about $10 billion to settle most of the Roundup lawsuits that were pending as of 2020, but failed to get a settlement covering future cases. New lawsuits have continued to pour in since then. Plaintiffs have said they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other forms of cancer due to using Roundup, either at home or on the job.

Bayer, which acquired Roundup as part of its $63 billion purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018, has said that decades of studies have shown Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are safe for human use.

Bayer, which acquired Roundup as part of its $63 billion purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018, has said that decades of studies have shown Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are safe for human use. AFP/Getty Images

“EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans, and the agency has repeatedly approved Roundup labels that did not contain cancer warnings,” Sauer said in the administration’s brief to the Supreme Court.

The company has had a mixed record at trial in the Roundup lawsuits. Bayer has prevailed in a series of Roundup trials, but it was also hit with large jury awards in the past few years, including a $2.1 billion verdict in a case in the state of Georgia in 2025.

Bayer has asked the Supreme Court to consider the Roundup litigation before, but was rebuffed in 2022. Since then, one federal appeals court agreed with the company in a split from other appeals courts.

Bayer has threatened to withdraw Roundup from the US market as it fights the litigation. The company replaced glyphosate in US consumer products with different weed-killing substances.

The post Supreme Court to hear Bayer’s appeal to block thousands of Roundup weedkiller lawsuits appeared first on Our Story Insight.

According to legal documents shared by gaming lawyer Daniel Wallach, the Ho-Chunk Nation has moved for a preliminary injunction to prevent Kalshi from offering sports event contracts on the Tribe’s lands for the duration of the lawsuit, arguing that it’s in violation of its State-Tribal Compact.

The lawsuit in question has been filed in the US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. It’s centered around the argument that Kalshi’s sports event contracts are not merely financial products but illegal bets that are in violation of both federal law and state constitutions, as well as undermine tribal exclusive gambling rights.

“By making its sports wagering contracts available on the Nation’s Indian Lands and offering for play to the general public the class III game of sports wagering, Kalshi violates the Nation’s Compact, Ordinance, and Gaming Commission regulations, and directly interferes with and impairs the Nation’s sovereign right to regulate gaming on its Indian Lands,” said the the Ho-Chunk Nation in the original lawsuit filings. “While masquerading as novel commodities and futures products, these event contracts are, substantively, nothing more than illegal, unregulated wagers on the outcomes of sporting events.”

Kalshi’s legal battles continue

Kalshi is fighting a war of many fronts, pushing back on lawsuits on similar grounds in Connecticut, California, Ohio, and more. Kalshi has already also been blocked from operating in Nevada, alongside other prediction markets.

This has, in part, led to Kalshi forming a coalition in defence of prediction markets, as the budding sector continues to pick up steam. In the case of the Ho-Chunk Nation’s lawsuit, Kalshi is pushing to have it thrown out entirely, but could be forced to cease operations in the meantime if the injunction is granted.

Featured image: Kalshi

The post Ho-Chunk Nation moves to block Kalshi from offering contracts during ongoing lawsuit appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Democrat Assembly Member Alex Bores filed the bill, dubbed A9125, on September 26. It aims to prevent sports betting operators from limiting sports bettors based on the size and frequency of their deposits and bets, or banning them entirely based on their success rate. The bill has now been referred to the Committee on Racing and Wagering. With the New York legislative session now closed until January, the bill won’t progress until then.

If the bill is passed, it would amend state law and mean that sportsbooks cannot limit or block users because they gain financially from their wagering activity. There would be exemptions in place to cover occasions when suspicious wagering activity is suspected or when there are indications of gambling addiction or related harm.

Whenever an authorized sports bettor is limited or banned, the bill would require the operator to provide written notice and explanation to the user within 24 hours.

Sportsbook legislation in New York

Bores’ attempt to level the playing field for bettors in New York follows on from another bill filed in April, which saw fellow Assembly Member Robert Carroll seek to introduce a limit on how much gamblers can wager within 24 hours. Known as A7962, the bill would implement a maximum total wagering amount of $5,000 and a maximum number of deposits of five per 24 hours per customer.

The bill has not progressed since being introduced and will now need to wait until the new year, in the same as as Bores’ A9125, thanks to the closed legislative session in New York.

Such bills echo similar efforts made in Connecticut that aim to establish maximum wager limits for online sports betting.

Featured image: Unsplash

The post New York assembly member wants to block sportsbooks from limiting bettors appeared first on Our Story Insight.

The regulator has asked Australian internet service providers (ISPs) to prohibit the following websites: 

• Slot Lounge
• Betzillo
• FastSpin99
• Spinit
• PokiesPro

ACMA states that since its first blocking request was made in November 2019, 1,322 illegal betting sites and their affiliates have been shut down. It is an ongoing issue, as once certain sites are blocked, others appear, but this enforcement tool is an effective one. 

Last month, the authority made a similar request for a number of sites to be blocked, including the prominent prediction platform, Polymarket.

ACMA also detailed that since new illegal online gambling rules were adopted eight years ago, around 200 platforms have been pulled from the Australian market.

Gambling online? Make sure the site is licensed in Australia. Using illegal gambling sites puts you at risk because you won’t have important consumer protections.

See the latest list of sites we’ve asked Australian internet providers to block: https://t.co/dnWCfyyIxL pic.twitter.com/LoXCfuVRws

— ACMA (@acmadotgov) September 17, 2025

ACMA issues warnings against use of illicit platforms

The government agency went on to remind consumers to maintain their vigilance against rogue online platforms, to ensure they are using reputable sources, and if not, they will not have any customer protections to fall back on. 

Australians have been made aware that they could lose their money using these domains, with other dangers including: illicit operators taking money deposits then preventing users from accessing winnings, operators suddenly closing down platforms and taking all funds with them, and the possibility of illicit operators attempting to take funds from users’ bank accounts without permission.

ACMA provided a link to its register for users to check if a website is licensed to operate in Australia. 

Image credit: Australian Communications and Media Authority

The post ACMA makes further request to block illicit gambling platforms appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Meta won a legal victory on Wednesday against a former employee who published an explosive, tell-all memoir, as an arbitrator temporarily prohibited the author from promoting or further distributing copies.

Sarah Wynn-Williams last week released “Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism,” a book that describes a series of incendiary allegations of sexual harassment and other inappropriate behavior by senior executives during her tenure at the company. Meta pursued arbitration, arguing that the book is prohibited under a nondisparagement contract she signed as a global affairs employee.

During an emergency hearing on Wednesday, the arbitrator, Nicholas Gowen, found that Meta had provided enough grounds that Ms. Wynn-Williams had potentially violated her contract, according to a legal filing posted by Meta. The two parties will now begin private arbitration.

In addition to halting book promotions and sales, Ms. Wynn-Williams must refrain from engaging in or “amplifying any further disparaging, critical or otherwise detrimental comments,” according to the filing. She also must retract all previous disparaging comments “to the extent within her control.”

The filing did not appear to limit the publisher, Flatiron Books, or its parent company, Macmillan, from continuing publication of the memoir.

“Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism” was released last week.Credit…Flatiron, via Associated Press

Meta has vehemently denied the allegations in the book.

The book is a “mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about our executives,” a Meta spokesman, Andy Stone, said in a statement. Ms. Wynn-Williams was fired for cause, he added, and an investigation at the time determined that “she made misleading and unfounded allegations of harassment.”

A spokeswoman for Flatiron Books did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for Ms. Wynn-Williams, who worked at what was then called Facebook from 2011 to 2018, did not comment.

The move to publish the arbitration filing is one of Meta’s most forceful public repudiations of a former employee’s tell-all memoir, several of which have been published over the past two decades.

Meta executives have also responded online to Ms. Wynn-Williams’s claims, calling most of them wildly exaggerated or flat-out false.

It is unclear whether Meta’s attempts to claw back Ms. Wynn-Williams’s book will ultimately be successful. In 2023, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that it is generally illegal for companies to offer severance agreements that prohibit workers from making potentially disparaging statements about former employers, including discussing sexual harassment or sexual assault accusations.

In a Meta shareholder report in 2022, the company’s board of directors said that it did not require employees “to remain silent about harassment or discrimination,” and that the company “strictly prohibits retaliation against any personnel” for speaking up on these issues.

And in 2018, Meta said it would no longer force employees to settle sexual harassment claims in private arbitration, following a similar stance taken by Google at the time.

Sheera Frenkel contributed reporting.

The post Meta Seeks to Block Further Sales of Ex-Employee’s Scathing Memoir appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Elon Musk is asking a federal court to stop OpenAI from converting into a fully for-profit business.

Attorneys representing Musk, his AI startup xAI, and former OpenAI board member Shivon Zilis filed for a preliminary injunction against OpenAI on Friday. The injunction would also stop OpenAI from allegedly requiring its investors to refrain from funding competitors, including xAI and others.

The latest court filings represent an escalation in the legal feud between Musk, OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman, as well as other long-involved parties and backers including tech investor Reid Hoffman and Microsoft.

Musk had originally sued OpenAI in March 2024 in a San Francisco state court, before withdrawing that complaint and refiling several months later in federal court. Attorneys for Musk in the federal suit, led by Marc Toberoff in Los Angeles, argued in their complaint that OpenAI has violated federal racketeering, or RICO, laws.

In mid-November, they expanded their complaint to include allegations that Microsoft and OpenAI had violated antitrust laws when the Chat GPT-maker allegedly asked investors to agree to not invest in rival companies, including Musk’s newest startup, xAI.

Microsoft declined to comment.

 In their motion for preliminary injunction, attorneys for Musk argue that OpenAI should be prohibited from “benefitting from wrongfully obtained competitively sensitive information or coordination via the Microsoft-OpenAI board interlocks.”

“Elon’s fourth attempt, which again recycles the same baseless complaints, continues to be utterly without merit,” an OpenAI spokesperson said in a statement.

OpenAI has emerged as one of the biggest startups in recent years, with ChatGPT becoming a major hit that has helped usher massive corporate enthusiasm over AI and related large language models.

Since Musk announced xAI’s debut in July 2023, his newer AI business has released its Grok chatbot and is raising up to $6 billion at a $50 billion valuation, in part to buy 100,000 Nvidia chips, CNBC reported earlier this month.

“Microsoft and OpenAI now seek to cement this dominance by cutting off competitors’ access to investment capital (a group boycott), while continuing to benefit from years’ worth of shared competitively sensitive information during generative AI’s formative years,” the lawyers wrote in the filing.

The attorneys wrote that the terms OpenAI asked investors to agree to amounted to a “group boycott” that “blocks xAI’s access to essential investment capital.”

The lawyers later added that OpenAI “cannot lumber about the marketplace as a Frankenstein, stitched together from whichever corporate forms serve the pecuniary interests of Microsoft.”

In July, Microsoft gave up its observer seat on OpenAI’s board, although CNBC reported that the Federal Trade Commission would continue to monitor the influence of two companies over the AI industry.

FTC Chair Linda Khan announced at the beginning of the year that the federal agency would initiate a “market inquiry into the investments and partnerships being formed between AI developers and major cloud service providers.” Some of the companies that the FTC mentioned as part of the study included OpenAI, Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft and Anthropic.

In the filing, attorneys for Musk also argue that OpenAI should be prohibited from “benefitting from wrongfully obtained competitively sensitive information or coordination via the Microsoft-OpenAI board interlocks.”

OpenAI originally debuted in 2015 as a non-profit and then in 2019, converted into a so-called capped-profit model, in which the OpenAI non-profit was the governing entity for its for-profit subsidiary. It’s in the process of being converted into a fully for-profit public benefit corporation that could make it more attractive to investors. The restructuring plan would also allow OpenAI to retain its non-profit status as a separate entity, CNBC previously reported.

Microsoft has invested nearly $14 billion in OpenAI but revealed in October as part of its fiscal first-quarter earnings report that it would record a $1.5 billion loss in the current period largely due to an expected loss from OpenAI.

In October, OpenAI closed a major funding round that valued the startup at $157 billion. Thrive Capital led the financing while investors, including Microsoft and Nvidia, also participated.

OpenAI has faced increasing competition from startups such as xAI, Anthropic and tech giants such as Google. The generative AI market is predicted to top $1 trillion in revenue within a decade, and business spending on generative AI surged 500% this year, according to recent data from Menlo Ventures.

CNBC reached out to attorneys for Musk on Saturday. They did not respond to requests for comment.

— CNBC’s Hayden Field contributed reporting

Watch: Elon Musk emerges as a key voice in Trump’s tech policy.

The post Elon Musk asks court to block OpenAI from converting to a for-profit appeared first on Our Story Insight.