Ohanian et al v. Apple Inc. et al
| 1:2020cv05162 |
| August 25, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 fr Diversity-Fraud |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
152
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 151 Order in favor of Apple Inc. against Regge Lopez, Tigran Ohanian. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated May 2, 2022, judgment is entered in favor of Defendants. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 5/2/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)
|
|
Filing
149
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that by April 29, 2022, the parties shall refile the stipulation of voluntary dismissal in accordance with the instructions of the Clerk of Court or file a joint letter with a status update. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 4/27/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
145
OPINION AND ORDER re: 130 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. filed by T-Mobile USA, Inc.. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Ohanian's claims against T-Mobile are dismissed. Plainti ff may seek leave to amend the Complaint no later than April 1, 2022 by filing a letter motion explaining how the deficiencies identified in this opinion can be cured and appending to the letter a proposed Second Amended Complaint marked to show changes from the current Amended Complaint. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket Number 130. ( Amended Pleadings due by 4/1/2022.), T-Mobile USA, Inc. terminated. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/18/2022) (tg) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
142
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 137 Letter Motion to Compel; granting 140 Letter Motion for Leave to File Document. The Court treats Apple Inc.'s pre-motion letter as a motion to compel. The motion is GRANTED IN PART and DEN IED IN PART. The Court cannot countenance Plaintiff Lopez's disregard for discovery obligations in this case. It is beyond the pale that Lopez would argue to this Court that his interactions with T-Mobile are not relevant to his claims aga inst Apple. The Complaint alleges that Lopez's interactions with T-Mobile set off the chain of events that led to his injury. Accordingly, Apple's motion to compel as to document request nos. 2, 3 and 5 is GRANTED. Lopez claims to have no documents in his possession, custody or control as to request nos. 1, 6, 7, 8 and 10. To the extent Lopez locates documents as to request nos. 1, 6, 7, 8 and 10, and has any additional documents responsive to request nos. 4 and 21, Apple 's motion to compel is GRANTED as to those requests. Apple's interrogatory nos. 2 and 3 are not contention interrogatories, but instead are "information of a similar nature" contemplated in Local Civil Rule 33.3(a) because the y seek the underlying description of documents containing the purported "false advertising" at the heart of Lopez's § 350 claim. Interrogatory numbers 4 and 18 plainly relate to a computation of damages alleged in the Amend ed Complaint, which is also in the scope of Local Civil Rule 33.3(a). The relevance of interrogatory nos. 9 and 19 is not clear from Apple's letter. Interrogatory nos. 13, 14 and 15 relate to communications with Apple, T-Mobile and others about the security flaw, which is plainly relevant even if beyond the scope of 33.3(a). As explained above, interrogatory nos. 5 and 6, which relate to Plaintiff's interactions with T-Mobile, are relevant. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 33.3( b) and in light of Lopez's statement that there are no such documents, Plaintiff shall respond to interrogatory numbers 5, 6, 13, 14 and 15. Plaintiff shall respond to interrogatory no. 17 to the extent it requests the date of the resolutio n of the security flaw but not to the broader question of how the flaw was resolved. Plaintiff does not raise any objections to interrogatory nos. 1, 7 and 8. Accordingly, Apple's motion to compel as to interrogatories is GRANTED as to inte rrogatory nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15 and 18, GRANTED IN PART as to interrogatory no. 17 and DENIED without prejudice as to interrogatory nos. 9 and 19. Plaintiffs' letter is accepted for filing even though it exceeds the three-p age limit set in Individual Rule II.A.1, and Apple's motion for leave to file a reply at Dkt. No. 140 is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' request for a discovery extension is denied because (1) Plaintiffs' letter does not identify any extraor dinary circumstances and (2) the parties have been on notice since January 26, 2022, that no further extensions will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motions at Dkt. Nos. 137 and 140. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/25/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing
138
ORDER with respect to 137 Letter Motion to Compel. Plaintiff Lopez shall file a response to this letter by February 24, 2022. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/22/2022) (mml)
|
|
Filing
122
ORDER denying as moot 110 Motion to Dismiss; denying as moot 112 Motion to Dismiss; denying as moot 114 Motion re: 110 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint., 112 MOTION to Dismiss and Strike Plaintiff Tigran Ohanian's Claim. , 114 MOTION to take Judicial Notice re: 112 MOTION to Dismiss and Strike Plaintiff Tigran Ohanian's Claims., 113 Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion Defendant Apple Inc.'s Request for Judicial Notice in Support of its , 121 LETTER MOTION for Conference re Leave to Amend Complaint addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Aaron J. Solomon dated January 14, 2022. ; granting in part and denying in part 121 Letter Motion for Conference re: 110 MOTIO N to Dismiss the Complaint., 112 MOTION to Dismiss and Strike Plaintiff Tigran Ohanian's Claims., 114 MOTION to take Judicial Notice re: 112 MOTION to Dismiss and Strike Plaintiff Tigran Ohanian's Claims, [1 13] Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion Defendant Apple Inc.'s Request for Judicial Notice in Support of its, 121 LETTER MOTION for Conference re Leave to Amend Complaint addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Aaron J. Sol omon dated January 14, 2022. Application GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. Plaintiffs' motion is denied as to the additional allegations for Plaintiff Lopez's claims against Apple because some of Lopez's claims survived Apple's motion to dismiss and Lopez does not intend to add new claims. The motion is granted as to Lopez's conforming to the Opinion and Order on Apple's motion to dismiss and as to Plaintiff Ohanian's changes. Plaintiffs shall file an amend ed complaint consistent with this Order by January 19, 2022. The pending motions to dismiss and related motion to take judicial notice are denied as moot. By January 21, 2022, if Defendant T-Mobile seeks to file a renewed motion to dismiss, Defenda nt T-Mobile and Plaintiff Ohanian shall file a joint letter proposing an expedited briefing schedule. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motions at Dkt. Nos. 110, 112, 114 and 121.. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 1/18/2022) (mml)
|
|
Filing
107
OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The NY GBL claims survive for transactions that took place in New York and are dismissed for transactions that took place outside New York. The fraudulent misrepresentation and unjust enrichment claims are dismissed. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket Number 42. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/16/2021) (mml)
|
|
Filing
101
ORDER granting 100 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Proposed Case Management and Scheduling Order. Application GRANTED. The parties' deadline to file a proposed Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order and joint letter is extended to October 29, 2021. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/25/2021) (jca)
|
|
Filing
97
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: It is hereby ORDERED that the motions to compel arbitration brought by T-Mobile and Apple Inc. are denied. It is further ORDERED that by October 22, 2021, the parties shall confer and submit a proposed Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order for the remainder of discovery as to both of Plaintiffs' claims and shall submit a joint letter providing (1) a proposed briefing schedule for any motion to dismiss Ohanian's claims, (2) a statement desc ribing the status of any settlement discussions and whether the parties would like a settlement conference with Magistrate Judge Cave, a court appointed mediator, or a private mediator retained by the parties and (3) any other information that the pa rties believe may assist the Court in this action. The parties shall mail or hand deliver to the Court a CD containing the five exhibits offered during the evidentiary hearing and the translation of Ohanian's Telegram post. The Clerk of Court i s respectfully directed to close the motions at Dkt. Nos. 79 and 81. Motions terminated: 79 MOTION to Compel Arbitration and Stay Claims filed by T-Mobile USA, Inc., 81 MOTION to Compel Arbitration as to Plaintiff Ohanian. filed by Apple Inc. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/14/2021) (mml)
|
|
Filing
94
ORDER: WHEREAS, the Order dated September 2, 2021, scheduled a final pretrial conference for October 7, 2021, at 3:00 P.M. It is hereby ORDERED that the October 7, 2021, final pretrial conference is rescheduled to October 7, 2021, at 2:00 P.M. The conference will be held on conference line: 888-363-4749, access code: 558-3333. ( Telephone Conference set for 10/7/2021 at 02:00 PM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/24/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
93
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall be prepared to proceed virtually on October 13, 2021, in the event a courtroom is not available. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/8/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
90
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall be ready to proceed to trial commencing on October 13, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. The parties shall submit a joint final pretrial order in accordance with the Courts Individual Rules by October 5, 2021. The parties shall confer and submit a joint, if possible, letter by September 1, 2021, setting forth their proposal for a remote or in-person trial. (Pretrial Order due by 10/5/2021, Ready for Trial by 10/13/2021.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 8/30/2021) (ate)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER denying without prejudice to renewal by formal motion 30 Motion to Compel Arbitration. It is hereby ORDERED that T-Mobile's motion to compel arbitration is denied without prejudice. T-Mobile shall file a renewed motion to compel arbi tration by July 14, 2021. Ohanian shall file a response by July 28, 2021. T-Mobile shall file a reply, if any, by August 4, 2021. The parties' initial memoranda shall not exceed twelve (12) pages and T-Mobile's reply shall not exceed six (6 ) pages. The Court will address the need for a bench trial following review of T-Mobile's renewed motion to compel arbitration. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Dkt. No. 30. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/9/2021) (kv)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER: For the reasons stated at the conference, it is hereby ORDERED that a bench trial will be held to resolve the issue of whether Plaintiff Ohanian agreed to arbitrate with Defendant T-Mobile. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Ohanian shall be deposed remotely by video from any place he chooses to be located that will permit the deposition. (As further set forth in this Order.) It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Lopez and Defendant Apple, Inc. shall meet and confer on a schedule for fact discovery excluding depositions on the merits of Plaintiff Lopez's claims and shall file a proposed Case Management Plan by April 2, 2021. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/25/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
52
OPINION AND ORDER re: 33 MOTION to Compel Arbitration and Stay the Case. filed by Apple Inc. For the foregoing reasons, decision is RESERVED on Defendants' motions to compel arbitration of Ohanian's claims pending further proceedings, and Apple's motion to compel arbitration of Lopez's claims is DENIED. By March 16, 2021, the parties shall meet and confer and file a joint letter explaining how they would like to proceed to resolve the factual issue. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 33. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/9/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER: ORDERED that only Plaintiff Lopez's claims were dismissed, without prejudice, against Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc., and Plaintiff Ohanians claims survive. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to reinstate Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. as a party to this action. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 10/27/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER granting 35 Letter Motion to Stay. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' application is GRANTED. All discovery and disclosure obligations are stayed pending resolution of the motion to compel arbitration. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 35. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/11/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the August 27, 2020, initial pretrial conference is cancelled. If the parties believe that a conference would nevertheless be useful, they should inform the Court immediately so the conference can be reinstated. Th e case management plan will issue in a separate order. Discovery will not be bifurcated. The parties should be aware that the Court does not extend the deadlines for discovery absent compelling circumstances. It is further ORDERED that by Septembe r 3, 2020, in addition to Defendants' answers or pre-motion letters proposing a motion to dismiss per Individual Rule III.C.2, Defendants shall file their motions to compel arbitration, and separately, an application to stay discovery not to exceed three (3) pages. The parties shall agree upon a briefing schedule for the motions to compel arbitration and notify the Court of the schedule. The parties shall comply with the Individual Rules' and Emergency Individual Rules' prov isions on page limits, exhibits and courtesy copies. When appropriate, Plaintiff shall file a pre-motion letter, in accordance with the Individual Rules, regarding its proposed motion for class certification, including a jointly proposed briefing schedule. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 8/25/2020) (rro)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Ohanian et al v. Apple Inc. et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
