Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1256

ORDER re: #910 Order, #1253 Endorsed Letter, #1255 Endorsed Letter. The Court received letters from defendants The Citco Group Ltd.; Citco Fund Services (Europe) B.V.; Citco (Canada) Inc.; Citco Global Custody N.V.; Citco Bank Nederland, N.V., Dublin Branch; and Citco Fund Services (Bermuda) Ltd. (collectively, the "Citco Defendants") and from Plaintiffs, respectively dated March 19 and March 24, 2014 (Dkt. Nos. 1253, 1255), seeking clarification of the Court's Decision and Order dated August 6, 2012 (Dkt. No. 910) (the "Order"). The Court provides the following clarification of the Order. The Order dismissed all of Plaintiffs' negligence-based initial investment claims against all of the defendants who were included in the defined term "Defendants" in the Order. (Dkt. No. 910, at 1-2.) These parties are as follows; PwC Canada and PwC Netherlands (together, the "PwC Defendants"); Fairfield Greenwich Ltd.; Fairfield Greenwich Group; Fairfield Heathcliff Capital, LLC; Fairfield Risk Services Ltd.; Greenwich Sentry L. P.; Fairfield Sentry Ltd.; Fairfield Greenwich (Bermuda) Ltd.; Fairfield Greenwich Advisors, LLC; Fairfield International Managers, Inc.; and Fairfield Greenwich Corp. (collectively, the "Fairfield Defendants"); GlobeOp Financial Services LLC ("GlobeOp" ); and the Citco Defendants (collectively with the PwC Defendants, the Fairfield Defendants, and GlobeOp, the "Defendants"). The fact that the final page of the Order refers to "the motion... of defendants PwC Canada and PwC Netherlands" (Dkt. No. 910, at 15) is purely ministerial and directs the electronic docketing department to terminate particular motions. That reference therefore should not be construed to imply that the Order applies only to the PwC Defendants. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Victor Marrero on 3/27/2014) (kgo)

Download PDF
. ,J" >':' . \ ;H)CU~\L:\ r ' I'! rCTRO\ICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -S!1J!f;;~-1 ! . ! )0(' #: - x \~~2~ ~/LF~\#-~Jj(~ I PASHA S. ANWAR, et al., 09 Civ. 0118 (VM) Plaintiffs, ORDER - against ­ FAIRFIELD GREENWICH LIMITED, et al., Defendants. ----------------------- --- -------X VICTOR MARRERO, United States District Judge. The Court received letters from defendants The Citco Group Ltd.; (Canada) Citco Inc.; Nederland, (Bermuda) from Plaintiffs, (Dkt. 2014 Citco N.V., Ltd. Nos. Fund Services Global Dublin (Europe) Custody Branch; (collectively, and the N.V.; Citco Citco Citco Fund Bank Servics "Citco Defendants") 1255), and seeking clarification of the Court's Decision and Order dated August 6, 910) B.V.; respectively dated March 19 and March 24, 1253, 2012 (Dkt. No. (the "Order"). The Court provides the following clarification of the Order. based The Order dismissed all of Plaintiffs' negligenceinitial defendants who investment were "Defendants" in the Order. parties are as (together, follows; claims included against in (Dkt. No. the 910, all of defined at 1-2.) the term These PwC Canada and PwC Netherlands the "PwC Defendants") -1­ i tl Fairfield Greenwich Ltd.; Fairfield LLC i Greenwich Fairfield Groupi Fairfield Risk Services Ltd. Fairfield Sentry Ltd.i Inc. ; (collectively, Financial the Services LLC Fairfield Defendants, Greenwich Defendants") ( "GlobeOp" ) with (Bermuda) the and GlobeOp, Ltd.j Fairfield International "Fairfield (collectively Defendants LLCi Fairfield and Capital, Greenwich Sentry L. P. ; i Fairfield Greenwich Fairfield Greenwich Advisors, Managers, Heathcliff i PwC and Corp. GlobeOp i the Citco Defendants, the the "Defendants"). The fact that the final page of the Order refers to "the motion . of defendants PwC Canada and PwC Netherlands" No. 910, at electronic motions. 15) is docketing purely ministerial department to and terminate directs (Dkt. the particular That reference therefore should not be construed to imply that the Order applies only to the PwC Defendants. SO ORDERED. Dated: New York, New York 27 March 2014 Victor Marrero U.S.D.J. -2­

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.


Why Is My Information Online?