Kraus USA, Inc. v. Magarik et al
| Kraus USA, Inc. |
| Sergio Magarik, Vonn, LLC, Leonid Valdberg, Vigo Industries, LLC and Nigel Challenger |
| Michael Rukhlin, Dan Lusby, Enpower, LLC, Russell Levi and Kraus China |
| Sergio Magarik |
| Sergio Magarik |
| Kraus USA, Inc. |
| 1:2017cv06541 |
| August 28, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Edgardo Ramos |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1030 |
| 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
237
CONSENT ORDER DISMISSING ALL CLAIMS, COUNTERCLAIMS AND/OR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE: IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, CONSENTED TO AND ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: Any and all claims and causes of action asserted in this action, and/or that could have been as serted in this action, by the Parties against one another are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, without attorneys' fees and without costs. (As further set forth in this Order.) The Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to close the file on this Action. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 5/24/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
232
ORDER: On August 28, 2017, Kraus USA, Inc., brought this action against Sergio Magarik a/k/a Sergei Magarik, Vonn, LLC a/k/a Vonn Lighting, Leonid Valdberg, Vigo Industries, LLC, and Nigel Challenger, alleging, inter alia, violations of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Doc. 1. On April 22, 2021, the Court conducted a telephonic conference. On that date, the Court ordered the Parties to file any discovery motions no later than May 21, 2021, and to complete all depositions no later than May 31, 2021. The depositions of Sergio Magarik, Todd Alexander, Russell Levi, Leonid Valdberg, Michael Rukhlin, and Ninicka Williams are to be completed on or before May 31, 2021. The Court expresses no opinion on the date or order in which depositions are to be conducted. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 5/5/2021) (nb)
|
|
Filing
206
ORDER with respect to 200 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; with respect to 200 Motion to Dismiss. Accordingly, the Court directs Defendants to make their arguments regarding striking portions of the pending motion to dismiss in the ir response to that motion, due January 23, 2021. Defendants further requests, for production of the asset purchase agreement between Kraus and Masco. Corp. and for an order compelling production of Alexander, Rukhlin, and Levi for depositions, are d enied without prejudice. The Kraus Parties' request for leave to file a motion to compel is also denied. The parties are directed to meet and confer on any remaining discovery disputes before raising them with the Court again. Finally, the Kraus Parties' request to strike Defendants' December 28 letter, Doc. 203, is denied. However, the Court renews its warning to both parties that failure to comply the Court's orders and individual practices may result in sanctions, including the Court striking non compliant filings. It is SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 1/5/2021) (kv)
|
|
Filing
196
ORDER granting 194 Letter Motion to Seal. Counterclaim Defendant Todd Alexander's request to file his confidential settlement agreement with Counterclaimaint Vigo Industries, LLC is granted. It is SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 12/1/2020) (ks)
|
|
Filing
188
ORDER: A settlement conference was held in the above-captioned action on October 21, 2020; no settlement was achieved. Therefore, the parties shall proceed in accordance with the June 5, 2020 order of the court appearing at Docket Entry No. 174. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 10/21/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
187
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a settlement conference shall be held in the above captioned action on October 21, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. The conference will be held by telephone. The parties are directed to call (888) 557-8511 and, thereafter, enter access code 4862532. ( Telephone Conference set for 10/21/2020 at 10:30 AM before Judge Edgardo Ramos.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 9/30/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
185
ORDER terminating 181 Letter Motion for Local Rule 37.2 Conference. Kraus USA, Inc. ("Plaintiff") brought this action against Sergio Magarik, Vonn, LLC, Leonid Valdberg, Vigo Industries, LLC, and Nigel Challenger (collectively "Defendants") on August 28, 2017. Doc. 1. The Court assumes familiarity with the facts and procedural posture of this action as previously set forth in its May 12, 2020 Opinion and Order. Doc. 166. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed it s amended complaint on May 22, 2020 and Defendants answered on June 4, 2020. Docs. 168 170. On August 6, 2020, the parties attended a telephonic conference before the Court regarding several outstanding discovery disputes, which were des cribed in Defendants' letters dated July 21, August 5, and August 6, 2020, and Plaintiff's letters dated July 23 and August 4, 2020. At the conclusion of the conference, having heard both parties, the Court directed Plaintiff to r espond to the arguments Defendants set forth in their most recent letter of August 6, 2020 requesting a premotion conference, Doc. 183, by August 11, 2020, in advance of the parties' next telephonic conference before the Court on August 14, 2020 at 11:30AM. The parties will call the Court using the following conference call information: (877) 411-9748; Access Code: 3029857#. In addition, Plaintiff and Defendants are both directed to respond to each other's document demands by August 20, 2020. Finally, Plaintiff's oral motion to quash Defendants' subpoenas to Bank of America and Bank Hapoalim is granted. Both subpoenas are quashed without prejudice. The Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate the letter motion at Doc. 181. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 8/6/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
180
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the settlement conference scheduled previously in the above-captioned action for on July 29, 2020, at 10:30 a.m., is cancelled. The parties are directed to confer and, thereafter, provide to the Court three dates on which all parties are available to participate in a settlement conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 7/28/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
175
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a settlement conference shall be held in the above captioned action on July 29, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. The conference will be held by telephone. The parties are directed to call (888) 557-8511 and, thereafter, enter access code 4862532. ( Telephone Conference set for 7/29/2020 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 6/24/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
173
JOINT CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material... (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 6/5/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
166
OPINION AND ORDER re: 160 AMENDED MOTION to Dismiss (correcting deficient docket entry 139) filed by Nigel Challenger, Leonid Valdberg, Vonn, LLC, Sergio Magarik, Vigo Industries, LLC. In sum, Defendants' motion for ju dgment on the pleadings is GRANTED with respect to Counts II, XII, XIII, XIV, and XVIII as to all Defendants, GRANTED with respect to Count X as to Defendants Vigo and Valdberg, and DENIED with respect to all remaining counts and as to all remain ing Defendants. Plaintiff's motion to amend is GRANTED with respect to Counts II, X, XII, XIII, and XIV and DENIED with respect to Count XVIII. The parties are directed to appear for a status conference on May 22, 2020 at 10:15 AM. The Court respectfully directs the Clerk to terminate this motion, Doc. 160. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 5/12/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
155
OPINION AND ORDER re: 140 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings . filed by Kraus USA, Inc.. In sum, Kraus' motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. The parties are directed to attend a status conference on October 10, 2019 at 11:30 A.M. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion, Doc. 140. It is SO ORDERED. (Status Conference set for 10/10/2019 at 11:30 AM before Judge Edgardo Ramos.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 9/25/2019) (kv)
|
|
Filing
112
OPINION AND ORDER re: 65 CROSS MOTION to Dismiss; MOTION to Strike Document No. 29 Defendant Sergio Magariks Counterclaim and Third-Party Complaint; 55 MOTION for Leave to File Counterclaim and Third-Party Complaint; 54 MOTION to Dismiss: In sum, the Court orders as follows: 1. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED without prejudice. Defendants will be permitted to renew their motion once the pleadings have closed. 2. Kraus and Third-Part y Defendants' cross-motion to dismiss Magarik's counterclaim and third-party complaint is DENIED. Third-Party Defendants' cross-motion to strike Magarik's third-party complaint is GRANTED. Magarik is granted leave to replead his c ounterclaim to join Third-Party Defendants. 3. Vigo's motion for leave to amend is GRANTED as to its counterclaim and DENIED as to its third-party complaint. Vigo is granted leave to replead its counterclaim to join Alexander. 4. If Magarik and Vigo choose to replead their counterclaims, they must do so by October 29, 2018. Kraus and any other counterclaim-defendants must answer or otherwise move with respect to the counterclaims by November 28, 2018. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions, Docs. 54, 55, 65. (Amended Pleadings due by 10/29/2018.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 9/28/2018) (jwh)
|
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.
