Alpha Capital Anstalt et al v. Schwell Wimpfheimer & Associates LLP et al
| Alpha Capital Anstalt and Ellis International, Ltd. |
| Schwell Wimpfheimer & Associates LLP, Dov Schwell, Michael Hughes, William Schmitz, Adeeb Saba and Mark Matthews |
| 1:2017cv01235 |
| February 17, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Gregory H. Woods |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 |
| 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
144
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, Defendants' motions are granted. Plaintiffs' claims, as articulated in counts one through three, are dismissed with prejudice and Plaintiffs are denied leave to replead the dismissed claims. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at Dkt. Nos. 133 and 136 and to close this case. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 3/30/2019) (mro) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
122
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 81 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint by Defendants Mark Matthews and Adeeb Saba filed by Adeeb Saba; 100 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint filed by Schwell Wimpfheimer & As sociates LLP; 92 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint. filed by Michael Hughes; 88 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by Dov Schwell; 97 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by Wil liam Schmitz. For the reasons stated herein, Defendants' motions to dismiss the amended complaint are GRANTED. Plaintiffs' Section 10(b) claims against Hughes, Schmitz, and Schwell are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs' Sec tion 10(b) claims against Saba and Matthews are dismissed with prejudice to the extent they are premised on affirmative oral misstatements by those defendants. Plaintiffs' Section 10(b) claims against Saba and Matthews in connection with the omissions related to the SEC investigation are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs' Section 20(a) claims are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs' common-law-fraud claims against Hughes and Schmitz are dismissed without prejudic e. Plaintiffs' common- law-fraud claims against Saba and Matthews are dismissed with prejudice to the extent they are premised on affirmative oral misstatements by those defendants. Plaintiffs' common-law-fraud claims against Saba and Matt hews in connection with the omissions related to the SEC investigation are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs are granted leave to replead those claims that have been dismissed without prejudice no later than thirty (30) days following the dat e of this order. See Rutolo v. City of New York, 514 F.3d 184, 191 (2d Cir. 2008) (noting that leave to amend is "liberally granted"). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at Dkt. Nos. 81, 88, 92, 97, and 100. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 3/30/2018) (anc)
|
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.
