Judge Juan Merchan’s law clerk wrote to attorneys involved in the case that the judge would wait to issue his highly anticipated decision on presidential immunity until Nov. 19. Merchan’s clerk also ordered Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to give his “view of appropriate steps going forward” in the case by that date.

The judge’s decision came after prosecutors for Bragg reached out to Merchan in an email to say that they and Trump’s legal team agreed that pausing the court proceedings was necessary because Trump’s election victory had added a new complication to the case.

“The People agree that these are unprecedented circumstances and … require careful consideration to ensure that any further steps in this proceeding appropriately balance the competing interests of (1) a jury verdict of guilt following trial that has the presumption of regularity; and (2) the Office of the President,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo wrote.

Merchan initially said he would decide by Tuesday whether the Supreme Court’s landmark presidential immunity decision meant Trump’s guilty verdict was untenable. Trump has argued the verdict should be thrown out, while Bragg has said he disagrees.

If Merchan ruled against Trump, the next step would have been for the judge to sentence Trump at the end of the month. The president-elect was convicted by a jury in May of falsifying business records, a low-level felony that carries a maximum of four years in prison.

However, doubts among legal experts about whether the sentencing would happen at all began to swirl as soon as Trump clinched his election win.

Merchan’s decision to push activity in the case until next week is the latest signal that the case could be winding down instead of moving toward sentencing.

Trump’s two federal criminal cases are heading toward similar fates because of the Department of Justice’s long-standing policy that it does not prosecute sitting presidents.

A source familiar with Trump’s legal plans told the Washington Examiner last week that his defense team planned to ask the judge in Manhattan to pause proceedings indefinitely because of constitutional conflicts with tying a president-elect up in court matters.

“There are a lot of grounds to stay, including potentially a supremacy clause argument, because the president has statutory duties during the transition,” the source said. “My strong suspicion is that sentencing will not occur.”