Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1192

LETTER addressed to Judge Victor Marrero from Bradley P. Smith dated 9/17/2013 re: Counsel for Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) and Plaintiffs in the Stipulating Actions, join in Standard Chartered's request that the Court enter the Proposed Order. Document filed by Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited.(tn)

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP

TEL.EPHONE: 1-212-558-4000
FACSIMIL.E: 1-212-558-3588

125 f!IJ~ c:?Wed

WWW.SULLCROM.COM

J.;Vew o/o#c" ~APj/10004-24.98
I'

I

!

_/' l

LOS ANGELES· PALO ALTO· WASHINGTON, D,C,

•

.______~J

FRANKFURT. LONDON. PARIS

BEIJING. HONG KONG -TOKYO

MELBOURNE-SYDNEY

September 17,2013
Via Federal Express
The Honorable Victor Marrero,
United States District Judge,
Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse,
500 Pearl Street,
New York, New York 10007.
Re:

Anwar, et ai. v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited, et aI.,
No. 09-CV -118 (VM) (FM) - Standard Chartered Cases

Dear Judge Marrero:
We write on behalf of Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas)
Ltd. ("Standard Chartered") to request that the Court enter the enclosed Stipulation and
Proposed Order (the "Proposed Order"), in which plaintiffs in six actions pending before
this Court as part of the above-captioned MDL proceeding (the "Stipulating Actions")
have agreed to dismiss certain of their claims based on the Court's prior rulings in the
MDL and to defer plaintiff-specific discovery in accordance with the terms ofthe
March 2,2012 Stipulation and Order Regarding Discovery in Specified Standard
Chartered Cases (Okt. No. 826) (the "March 2012 Stipulation"). Plaintiffs in the
Stipulating Actions join in Standard Chartered's request that the Court enter the Proposed
Order.
The Stipulating Actions were filed in or transferred to this Court after the
close of general fact discovery on May 4,2012 and have not been subject to prior motion
practice in these proceedings. To avoid "duplicative motion or pleading practice on
matters already considered by this Court," the Court's Second Amended Scheduling
Order Regarding Standard Chartered Cases requires the parties to apply this Court's prior
rulings to all Standard Chartered Cases, and to "confer and determine whether they can
agree that such claim[s] ... shall be dismissed pursuant to the bases set forth" in the
Court's prior rulings. (Dkt. No. 609,.,. 15, 16.) The parties to the Stipulating Actions
have conferred, and have agreed to the terms of the Proposed Order, which would
(i) strike allegations of misrepresentation that plaintiffs made in the context of their
breach of fiduciary duty claims; and Oi) strike allegations of misrepresentation that
plaintiffs made in the context of their negligent misrepresentation claims concerning due

-2­

The Honorable Victor Marrero

diligence and Fairfield Sentry. Plaintiffs' remaining allegations are not affected by the
terms of the Proposed Order and plaintiffs maintain their right to appeal the reasoning of
the Court cited as the basis for striking the affected allegations and/or to file Amended
Complaints. Standard Chartered likewise reserves its ability to argue at a later time that
the remaining claims in the Stipulating Actions should be dismissed under the Court's
prior orders or for other reasons.
In addition, the Proposed Order defers plaintiff-specific discovery in the
Stipulating Actions in accordance with the March 2012 Stipulation until after the Court
has ruled on dispositive motions, including motions for summary judgment, on a subset
of the Standard Chartered Cases (the "Summary Judgment Cases"). Because the
Stipulating Actions raise allegations against Standard Chartered similar or identical to
those in the Summary Judgment Cases, the Court's rulings in the Summary Judgment
Cases likely will clarify what, if any, plaintiff-specific issues need to be developed for
trial, and the parties in the Stipulating Actions can then efficiently address those issues.
The Proposed Order will not impact the coordinated discovery and pre-trial proceedings
in other cases in this MDL proceeding, but instead, will likely enhance the overall
efficiency of the MDL by deferring a significant amount of burdensome and potentially
unnecessary plaintiff-specific discovery.
The parties to the Stipulating Actions thus respectfully request that the
Court enter the Proposed Order.
Respectfully submitted,

Zi~
(Enclosure)
cc:

Laurence E. Curran, Esq.
(bye-mail)
Standard Chartered Plaintiffs' Steering Committee

(courtesy copy bye-mail)

SO ORDERED.

tlrl(f~/3

/

-~ ....

/~" ... ~~-:::;?

~;:;~--

DATE;;:::»

VICTOR MARRERO. U.S.DJ.