FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund, Ltd. et al v. Citibank, N.A. et al
| FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund, Ltd., Sonterra Capital Master Fund, LTD. and FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund, L.P. |
| Citibank, N.A., CitiGroup Inc., Bank Of America Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., JPMorgan Chase & Co, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc., RBS Securities Japan Limited, UBS AG, UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd., ING Groep NV, ING Bank N.V., BNP Paribas, S.A., BNP Paribas North America, Inc., BNP Paribas Securities Corp., BNP Paribas Prime Brokerage, Inc., Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd., Barclays PLC, Barclays Bank PLC, Barclays Capital Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Credit Agricole S.A., Credit Suisse Group AG, Credit Suisse AG, Standard Chartered Bank, Standard Chartered PLC, DBS Bank Ltd., DBS Group Holdings Ltd., DBS Vickers Securities (USA) Inc., United Overseas Bank Limited, Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Ltd., Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, HSBC Bank USA, N.A., HSBC Holdings plc, HSBC North America Holdings Inc., HSBC USA Inc., Macquarie Bank Ltd., Macquarie Group Ltd., Commerzbank AG and John Does Nos. 1-50 |
| 1:2016cv05263 |
| July 1, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Alvin K. Hellerstein |
| Antitrust |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1 |
| Plaintiff |
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
576
ORDER terminating 445 Motion to Dismiss; terminating 471 Motion for Settlement. Pursuant to my Orders granting preliminary approval of class action settlements (ECF Nos. 510-515) and my Orders of final judgment and dismissal (ECF Nos. 554-566, 570), the Clerk of Court shall terminate the open motions at ECF Nos. 445 and 471. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 3/7/23) (yv)
|
|
Filing
570
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WITH DEUTSCHE BANK AG. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: In so holding, the Court finds that, solely for purposes of settlement, the Settlement Class meets all of the applicable requir ements of FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a) and (b)(3). The Court hereby finds, in the specific context of this Settlement, that: (i) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members is impracticable, FED. R. Crv. P. 23(a)(l); (ii) common questions of law and fact exist with regard to Deutsche Bank's alleged manipulation of SIBOR-and/or SOR-based Derivatives, FED. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2); (iii) the Representative Plaintiffs' claims in this litigation are typical of those of the Settlement Class Members, FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a)(3); (iv) the Representative Plaintiffs' interests do not conflict with, and are co-extensive with, those of absent Settlement Class Members; and (v) Lowey Dannenberg, P.C. ("Cla ss Counsel") has adequately represented the interests of the Settlement Class, FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a)( 4). The Court also finds that common issues of fact and law predominate over any questions affecting only individual members and that a clas s action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating this controversy. FED. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). Representative Plaintiffs are hereby approved to serve as representatives of such Settlement Class for purposes of the Settlement. Lowey Dannenberg, P.C. is appointed Class Counsel to the Settlement Class for the purposes of the Settlement. In the Action only and solely for purposes of the Settlement, this Court: (i) has personal jurisdiction over Representati ve Plaintiffs, Deutsche Bank, and all Settlement Class Members, and (ii) subject matter jurisdiction over the Action to consider the Settlement Agreement and all exhibits attached thereto. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proced ure, this Court hereby finally approves the Settlement, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, and finds that the Settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable and adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class, including the Re presentative Plaintiffs. In reaching this conclusion, the Court considered the factors set forth in City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448, 463 (2d Cir 1974), abrogated on other grounds by Goldberger v. Integrated Res., Inc., 209 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2000). This Court fiuther finds that the Settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement is the result of arm's-length negotiations between experienced counsel representing the interests of the Parties, and that Class Counsel and the Representative Plaintiffs adequately represented the Settlement Class for the purpose of entering into and implementing the Settlement Agreement. The Court finds that the relief provided by the Settlement is adequate and Settlement Class Members are treated equitably. Accordingly, the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is hereby approved in all respects. The Parties are hereby directed to carry out the Settlement Agreement in accordance with all of its terms and provisions, including the termination provisions. The Court hereby approves the release and covenant not to sue set forth in Section 12 of the Settlement and directs dismissal of the Action as against Deutsche Bank and any Released Parties (but not any other Defendant) fully, finally and with prejudice, pursuant to the terms of the Settlement and the Final Judgment to be entered concurrently herewith. The Court permanently bars and enjoins the Releasing Parties and all Settling Class Members from: (a) filing, commencing, prosecuting, intervening in, or participating ( as class members or otherwise) in any other lawsuit or administrative, regulatory, arbitration, or other proceeding in any jurisdiction against Deutsche Bank or any Released P arties based on the Released Claims; (b) filing, commencing, or prosecuting a lawsuit or administrative, regulatory, arbitration, or other proceeding as a class action on behalf of any Settlement Class Members (including by seeking to amend a pend ing complaint to include class allegations or seeking class certification in a pending action), against Deutsche Bank or any Released Parties based on the Released Claims; (c) organizing members of the Settlement Class into a separate group, class , or subclass for purposes of pursuing as a purported class action any lawsuit or administrative, regulatory, arbitration, or other proceeding (including by seeking to amend a pending complaint to include class allegations, or seeking class ce rtification in a pending action) against Deutsche Bank or any Released Parties based on the Released Claims; or (d) assisting any third party in the prosecution of any Released Claims against Deutsche Bank or any Released Parties and as further se t forth in this Order. The Distribution Plan and the Proof of Claim and Release Form are each approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate. Class Counsel's request for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses (and Incentive Awards for the Representative Plaintiffs) shall be the subject of a separate order by the Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 11/29/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
566
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WITH HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: For purposes only of the settlement of the Released Claims set forth in the Settlement Agree ment (the "Settlement"), the Court hereby finally certifies the Settlement Class as further set forth in this Order. In so holding, the Court finds that, solely for purposes of settlement, the Settlement Class meets all of the applicable requirements of FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a) and (b)(3). The Court hereby finds, in the specific context of this Settlement, that: (i) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members is impracticable, FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a )(l); (ii) common questions of law and fact exist with regard to HSBC's alleged manipulation of and/or SOR-based Derivatives, FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a)(2); (iii) the Representative Plaintiffs' claims in this litigation are typical of those of the Settlement Class Members, FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a)(3); and (iv) the Representative Plaintiffs' interests do not conflict with, and are co-extensive with, those of absent Settlement Class Members; and (v) Lowey Dannenberg, P.C. ("Class Counsel") has adequately represented the interests of the Settlement Class, FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a)(4). The Court also finds that common issues of fact and law predominate over any questions affecting only individual members and that a class act ion is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating this controversy. FED. R. CIV. P. 23(b)(3). Representative Plaintiffs are hereby approved to serve as representatives of such Settlement Class for purposes of the Settlement. Lowey Dannenberg, P.C. is appointed Class Counsel to the Settlement Class for the purposes of the Settlement. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court hereby finally approves the Settlement, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, and finds that the Settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable and adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class, including the Representative Plaintiffs. In reaching this conclusion, the Court cons idered the factors set forth in City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448, 463 (2d Cir. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by Goldberger v. Integrated Res., Inc., 209 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2000). This Court further finds that the Settlement set fo rth in the Settlement Agreement is the result of aim's-length negotiations between experienced counsel representing the interests of the Parties, and that Class Counsel and the Representative Plaintiffs adequately represented the Settlement C lass for the purpose of entering into and implementing the Settlement Agreement. The Court finds that the relief provided by the Settlement is adequate and Settlement Class Members are treated equitably. Accordingly, the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is hereby approved in all respects. The Parties are hereby directed to carry out the Settlement Agreement in accordance with all of its terms and provisions, including the termination provisions. Without affecting the final ity of the Final Approval Order for purposes of appeal, the Court reserves exclusive jurisdiction over the implementation and enforcement of the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement contemplated thereby and over the enforcement of this Final Ap proval Order. The Court also retains exclusive jurisdiction to resolve any disputes that arise out of or relate to the Settlement Agreement, the Settlement, or the Settlement Fund ( except for such disputes and controversies as are subject to Sect ion 37 of the Settlement Agreement, which disputes and controversies shall be governed by the respective terms of such section), to consider or approve administration costs and fees, including but not limited to fees and expenses incurred to admin ister the Settlement after the entry of the Final Approval Order, and to consider or approve the amounts of distributions to Settlement Class Members. In addition, without affecting the finality of this Final Approval Order, the Representative Pla intiffs, HSBC, and the Settlement Class hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for any suit, action, proceeding, or dispute arising out of or relating to th is Final Approval Order or the Settlement Agreement. Except as otherwise provided in the Settlement Agreement, any disputes involving the Representative Plaintiffs, HSBC, or Settling Class Members concerning the implementation of the Settlement A greement shall be submitted to the Court. The Court hereby approves the release and covenant not to sue set forth in Section 12 of the Settlement and directs dismissal of the Action as against HSBC and any Released Parties (but not any other Defe ndant) fully, finally and with prejudice, pursuant to the terms of the Settlement and the Final Judgment to be entered concurrently herewith. The Court permanently bars and enjoins the Releasing Parties and all Settling Class Members from: (a) fi ling, commencing, prosecuting, intervening in, or participating ( as class members or otherwise) in any other lawsuit or administrative, regulatory, arbitration, or other proceeding in any jurisdiction against HSBC or any Released Parties based o n the Released Claims; (b) filing, commencing, or prosecuting a lawsuit or administrative, regulatory, arbitration, or other proceeding as a class action on behalf of any Settlement Class Members (including by seeking to amend a pending complaint to include class allegations or seeking class certification in a pending action), against HSBC or any Released Parties based on the Released Claims; (c) organizing members of the Settlement Class into a separate group, class, or subclass for purpo ses of pursuing as a purported class action any lawsuit or administrative, regulatory, arbitration, or other proceeding (including by seeking to amend a pending complaint to include class allegations, or seeking class certification in a pending a ction) against HSBC or any Released Parties based on the Released Claims; or (d) assisting any third party in the prosecution of any Released Claims against HSBC or any Released Parties. The Court permanently bars and enjoins claims by any Person against HSBC or any Released Parties for all or a portion of any amounts paid or awarded in the Action by way of settlement, judgment or otherwise. To the extent pe1mitted by law, the Court permanently bars and enjoins claims against HSBC and any Released Parties for contribution or indemnification (however denominated) for all or a portion of any amounts paid or awarded in the Action by way of settlement, judgment, or otherwise by (a) any of the other Defendants currently named in the Act ion; (b) any other Person formerly named as a party in the Action; or (c) any other Person subsequently added or joined as a party in the Action. Should any court determine that any Defendant is or was legally entitled to any kind of set-off, appo rtionment, contribution, or indemnification from HSBC or any Released Parties arising out of or related to Released Claims, the Releasing Parties agree that any money judgment subsequently obtained by the Releasing Parties against any Defendant s hall be reduced to an amount such that, upon paying the entire amount, the Defendant would have no claim for set-off, apportionment, contribution, indemnification, or similar claims against HSBC or atty Released Parties. The Court permanently bars and enjoins claims by HSBC or any Released Parties against any other Defendants for all or a portion of any amounts paid or awarded in the Action by way of settlement, judgment or otherwise. To the extent permitted by law, the Court permanently ba rs and enjoins claims by HSBC and any Released Parties for contribution or indemnification (however denominated) from other Defendants for all or a portion of any amounts paid or awarded in the Action by way of settlement, judgment, or otherwise a gainst atty of the other Defendants currently named in the Action and absolves the other Defendants against any claims for contribution, indemnification, or similar claims from the Released Parties arising out of or related in any way to the Relea sed Claims, in the manner and to the fullest extent permitted under the law of New York or any other jurisdiction that might be construed or deemed to apply for claims of contribution, indemnification, or similar claims against any of the other D efendants. For the avoidance of doubt, this paragraph shall not bar any claims, including claims for contribution or indemnification (however denominated) by HSBC and/or any Released Parties against any third parties other than other Defendants in this Action. The Distribution Plan and the Proof of Claim and Release Form are each approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court's cetification of the Settlement Class and appointment of the Representative Plaintiffs as class represe ntatives, as provided herein, is without prejudice to, or waiver of, the rights of any Defendant to contest any other request by the Representative Plaintiffs to certify a class. The Court's findings in this Final Approval Order shall have no e ffect on the Court's ruling on any motion to certify any class or to appoint class representatives in this litigation or any challenge to the Representative Plaintiffs' capacity to litigate or to represent a putative class, and no party may cite or refer to the Court's approval of the Settlement Class as binding or persuasive authority with respect to any such motion or challenge. Class Counsel's request for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses (and Incentive Awards for the Representative Plaintiffs) shall be the subject of a separate order by the Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 11/29/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
523
ORDER AMENDING ORDERS PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENTS, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: The June 9 Orders are modified to the extent described herein. The deadline to substantially complete mailing of the Class Notice shall be extended from Septembe r 19, 2022 to October 3, 2022; The deadline for the Settlement Administrator to file a sworn statement attesting to compliance with the notice provisions shall be extended from October 3, 2022 to October 10, 2022; The deadline for Class Counsel to file their motions for payment of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses, incentive awards, and for final approval of the Settlements shall be extended from October 3, 2022 to October 10, 2022; The deadline to submit any Request for Ex clusion from the Settlements (the "Exclusion Bar Date") shall be extended from October 17, 2022 to October 31, 2022; The deadline to file any objections or any request to be heard shall be extended from October 17, 2022 to October 31, 2022 ; There will be no change to the scheduled Fairness Hearing, which will be held on November 29, 2022 at 12:00 p.m. in Courtroom 14D of this Courthouse before the undersigned, to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement Agreement. Class Counsel are directed to post this Order on the settlement website as soon as is practicable. Except as modified herein, the June 9 Orders remain in effect. ENTERED. ( Motions due by 10/10/2022.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 9/19/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
517
ORDER CONCERNING SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATOR REPORTING IN CONNECTION WITH DISTRIBUTION OF THE NET SETTLEMENT FUNDS. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Except for the terms expressly defined herein, the Court adopts and incorporates the definitions in the Settlement Agreements for the purposes of this Order. 2. Representative Plaintiffs will file a motion(s) for distribution of the Net Settlement Funds following the time A.B. Data has completed its processing, review and auditing of the Proofs of C laim and Release submitted in connection with the administration of claims for the Settlements. 3. In connection with the motion(s) for distribution of the Net Settlement Funds, A.B. Data will provide a declaration that will report on the following topics as further set forth in this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 6/17/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
515
ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WITH DEUTSCHE BANK AG, SCHEDULING A HEARING FOR FINAL APPROVAL THEREOF, AND APPROVING THE PROPOSED FORM AND PROGRAM OF NOTICE TO THE CLASS. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: The Court finds that it has subject matter jurisdiction to preliminarily approve the Settlement Agreement, including all exhibits thereto, and the Settlement contained therein under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Solely for purposes of the Settlement, the Settlement Class is hereby preliminarily certified and maintained as a class action, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court finds that the applicable provisions of Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have been sati sfied and that the Court will likely be able to approve the Settlement and certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment. The Settlement Class is defined as further set forth in this Order. The Court hereby appoints Lowey Dannenberg, P.C. as Class Counsel to such Settlement Class for purposes of the Settlement, having determined that the requirements of Rule 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are fully satisfied by this appointment. The Court appoints A.B. Data, Ltd. as Settlement Administrator for purposes of the Settlement. Fund Liquidation Holdings LLC, Moon Capital Partners Master Fund Ltd., and Moon Capital Master Fund Ltd. are hereby appointed as representatives of the Settlement Class. A hearing will be h eld on or about November 29, 2022 at 12 p.m. in Courtroom 140 of this Courthouse before the undersigned to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement (the "Fairness Hearing"). All proceedings in this Action as to Deutsche Bank, other than such proceedings as may be necessary to implement the proposed Settlement or to effectuate the terms of the Settlement Agreement, are hereby stayed and suspended until further order of this Court. The Court prelimina rily approves the establishment of the Settlement Fund defined in the Settlement Agreement (the "Settlement Fund") as a qualified settlement fund pursuant to Section 468B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder. The Court appoints Citibank, N.A. to act as Escrow Agent for the Settlement Fund. Class Counsel shall file their motions for payment of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses, incentive awards, and for final approval of the Settlement on or before October 3, 2022; and reply papers, if any, shall be filed no later than seven (7) days before the Fairness Hearing. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 6/9/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
436
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT, I held a status conference on Thursday, October 21, 2021. I ordered as follows: 1. Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File the Fourth Amended Class Action Complaint, ECF No. 347, is gra nted, with consent and without waiver of, or prejudice to, any defenses. The Clerk of the Court shall terminate ECF No. 347. 2. All motions to dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint, on jurisdictional or substantive grounds, or and party to the Compl aint, shall be filed by November 24, 2021. Opposition papers shall be filed by December 23, 2021. Reply papers shall be filed by January 13, 2022. These dates are not adjournable. SO ORDERED. ( Motions due by 11/24/2021., Responses due by 12/23/2021, Replies due by 1/13/2022.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 10/21/21) (yv)
|
|
Filing
430
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP AND ORDER, Based on the accompanying declaration, the law firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP ("WilmerHale") hereby withdraws as counsel of record for Defendants The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (n/k/a NatWest Group plc), The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (n/k/a NatWest Markets plc), and RBS Securities Japan Limited (collectively, "Defendants") in the above-captioned matter. In particular, the following counsel withdraw from this action and respectfully request that their names and email addresses be removed from the official docket: Jamie S. Dycus, Fraser L. Hunter, Jr. SO ORDERED. (Attorney Jamie Stephen Dycus and Fraser Lee Hunter, Jr terminated.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 8/25/21) (yv)
|
|
Filing
425
ORDER granting 424 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. Upon the parties' request, the status conference previously scheduled for July 9, 2021, is hereby adjourned to August 24, 2021, at 2:30 p.m. SO ORDERED. Telephone Conference set for 8/24/2021 at 02:30 PM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 6/24/2021) (kv)
|
|
Filing
415
ORDER re: 414 Notice of Withdraw of Counsel filed by Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. Upon the motion of Elizabeth A. Cassady for leave to withdraw as counsel for defendant MUFG Bank, Ltd. (f/k/a The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd.) ("MUFG Bank"), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The motion is granted. SO ORDERED. Attorney Elizabeth A Cassady terminated. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 5/24/2021) (vfr) Modified on 5/24/2021 (vfr).
|
|
Filing
393
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE re: 347 MOTION for Leave to File Fourth Amended Class Action Complaint filed by Fund Liquidation Holdings LLC, 318 JOINT MOTION to Dismiss the Third Amended Class Action Complaint filed by Standard Chartered Bank, Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd., Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Ltd., Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., BNP Paribas, S.A., UBS AG, Credit Suisse AG, Credit Agricole Corporate and Inves tment Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, United Overseas Bank Limited, Bank of America, N.A., Deutsche Bank AG, DBS Bank Ltd., 314 MOTION for Settlement Preliminary Approval o f Class Action Settlement filed by Sonterra Capital Master Fund, LTD., Fund Liquidation Holdings LLC, FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund, L.P. Because the APA does not effect the assignment of claims from FrontPoint to FLH, plaintiff lack s standing to bring its antitrust and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims. Defendants' motion to dismiss the case is granted. Pursuant to my oral order at the May 2, 2019 hearing, Tr. at 5:11-16, plaintiff shall file an unredacted copy of the APA on the docket. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 124 (2d Cir. 2006). The motions for preliminary approval of the class settlements and to file a Fourth Amended Complaint are also denied. The clerk is instructed to terminate the motions (ECF 318, 314, 347), grant judgment to defendants, and close the case. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 7/25/2019) (ne) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
302
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS re: 238 MOTION to Dismiss the Corrected Second Amended Class Action Complaint filed by Barclays Capital Inc., Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc., Standard Chartered Bank, Citibank, N.A., DBS Group Holdings Ltd., CitiGroup Inc., Credit Suisse International, HSBC North America Holdings Inc., Credit Suisse AG, Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Barclays Bank PLC, DBS Bank Ltd., Macquarie Group Ltd., Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Ltd., UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd., Barclays PLC, Macquarie Bank Ltd., Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Bank Of America Corporation, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., ING Groep NV, ING Bank N.V., Credit Suisse Group AG, Standard Chartered PLC, Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd., BNP Paribas North America, Inc., Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., ING Capital Markets LLC, HSBC Bank US A, N.A., BNP Paribas, S.A., JPMorgan Chase & Co, UBS AG, BNP Paribas Prime Brokerage, Inc., HSBC USA Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, RBS Securities Japan Limited, Commerzbank AG, DBS Vickers Securities (USA) Inc., BNP Paribas Securities C orp., UOB Global Capital, LLC, HSBC Holdings plc, ANZ Securities, Inc., Credit Agricole S.A., The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, Bank of America, N.A., United Overseas Bank Limited. For the reasons state above, defe ndants' motions are granted in part and denied in part, as follows: I. Antitrust Claims a. The antitrust claim (Count I) is dismissed without leave to amend as against the defendants who were not SIBOR Panel Members (ANZ Securities Inc., Bank o f America Corporation, Barclays Bank PLC, Barclays Capital Inc., Barclays PLC, BNP Bamibas North America Inc., BNP Bamibas Prime Brokerage Inc., BNP Bamibas Securities Corporation, Citigroup Inc., Commerzbank AG, Credit Agricole A.S., Credit Suisse G roup AG, Credit Suisse International, DBS Group Holdings LTD, DBS Vickers Securities (USA) Inc., HSBC Bank USA N.A., HSBC Holdings PLC, HSBC North America Holdings Inc., HSBC USA Inc., ING Capital Markets LLC, ING Groep N.V., JP Morgan Chase & Co., M acquarie Bank LTD, Macquarie LTD, RBS Securities Japan Limited, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, Standard Chartered PLC, UBS Securities Japan Co. LTD, and UOB Global Capital LLC). b. The antitrust claims remain as against the SIBOR Panel Members (Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Bank of America N.A., The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd., BNP Paribas, Citibank N.A., Credit Suisse AG, DBS Bank Ltd, Deutsche Bank AG, The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd., ING Bank N.V., J PMorgan Chase Bank N.A., OverseaChinese Banking Corporation Ltd, The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Standard Chartered Bank, UBS AG, United Overseas Bank Ltd., and Credit Agricole CIB). c. The antitrust claims, as alleged by Plaintiff Sonterra, are dism issed without leave to amend. Since no claims for relief remain as to Sonterra, Sonterra's complaint is dismissed entirely. See Dkt. No. Dkt. No. 30. II. Personal Jurisdiction a. The Foreign Defendants who did not serve on the SIBOR Panel are di smissed without leave to amend for lack of personal jurisdiction (Barclays Bank PLC, Barclays PLC, Commerzbank AG, Credit Agricole S.A., Credit Suisse Group AG, Credit Suisse International, DBS Group Holdings LTD, HSBC Holdings PLC, ING Groep N.V., M acquarie Bank LTD., Macquarie LTD, RBS Securities Japan Limited, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, Standard Chartered PLC, and UBS Securities Japan Co. LTD). III. RICO Claims a. Count II (RICO) and Count III (RICO conspiracy) are dismissed withou t leave to amend. IV. Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing a. The motion to dismiss Count IV (breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing) for failure to state a claim is denied. V. Real Party in Interest a. Plaintiffs are granted leave to amend to substitute the real party in interest and allege the assignments of interest. The clerk shall terminate the motion (Dkt. No. 238). Plaintiffs shall file a third amended complaint to amend the caption, and reflect the r ulings in this opinion, by October 25, 2018. Defendants remaining in this case shall file their answers or otherwise respond by November 15, 2018. The parties shall appear for a status conference on November 28, 2018, at 2:30 P.M. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 10/4/2018) (ne)
|
|
Filing
225
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS re: 144 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Class Action Complaint, filed by Barclays Capital Inc., Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc., Standa rd Chartered Bank, Citibank, N.A., DBS Group Holdings Ltd., CitiGroup Inc., Credit Suisse International, HSBC North America Holdings Inc., Credit Suisse AG, Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Barclays Bank PLC, DBS Bank Ltd., Macquarie G roup Ltd., Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Ltd., UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd., Barclays PLC, Macquarie Bank Ltd., Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Bank Of America Corporation, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., ING G roep NV, ING Bank N.V., Credit Suisse Group AG, Standard Chartered PLC, Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd., BNP Paribas North America, Inc., Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., ING Capital Markets LLC, HSBC Bank USA, N.A., BNP Paribas, S.A., JPMorgan Chase & Co, UBS AG, BNP Paribas Prime Brokerage, Inc., HSBC USA Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, RBS Securities Japan Limited, Commerzbank AG, DBS Vickers Securities (USA) Inc., BNP Paribas Securities Corp., UOB Gl obal Capital, LLC, HSBC Holdings plc, ANZ Securities, Inc., Credit Agricole S.A., The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, Bank of America, N.A., United Overseas Bank Limited. After considering the briefs submitted by the pa rties and their oral arguments, for the reasons discussed in this opinion and order, I hold that defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part. I grant plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint, except with respect to their unjust enrichment claim, which is dismissed with prejudice. The Foreign Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is granted. All claims against the Foreign Defendants are dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend to make plausible allegations of personal jurisdiction over the Foreign Defendants. Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of Article III standing is denied. Defendants' motion to dismiss Count I (antitrust) as alleged by pla intiff FrontPoint is denied as alleged against the defendants who served on the SIBOR panel. Defendants' motion to dismiss Count I (antitrust) as alleged by plaintiff Sonterra is granted, for failure to establish any connection between defendant s' conduct and its alleged injury. Defendants' motion to dismiss Counts II and III (RICO and RICO conspiracy) is granted. Defendants Deutsche Bank and Citibank's motion to dismiss Count IV (Frontpoint's claim for breach of the cov enant of good faith and fair dealing) is granted. Defendants' motion to dismiss Count V (unjust enrichment) is granted as a matter of law. Count V is dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend. The clerk shall terminate the motion (Dkt. No. 144). Plaintiffs shall file a second amended complaint by September 18, 2017. Defendants shall answer or move by October 18, 2017, and as further set forth in this order. (Amended Pleadings due by 9/18/2017.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 8/18/2017) (ras)
|
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
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.
