Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1397

[VACATED and RECALLED] MANDATE of USCA (Certified Copy) USCA Case Number 15-792(L); 15-806(con). Petitioners have moved, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), for leave to appeal the district court's order granting Respondents' motion for class certification. Petitioners also have moved for leave to file replies in support of their petitions. More recently, however, the Petitioners in the case docketed under 15-806 have moved for their Rule 23(f) petition to be held in abeyance and for that motion to be sealed. Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the motions to file replies are GRANTED, the motion to hold in abeyance the Rule 23(f) petition docketed under 15-806 is GRANTED, and the motion to seal the preceding motion is GRANTED. The Rule 23(f) petition docketed under 15-792 is DENIED because an immediate appeal is unwarranted. See Sumitomo Copper Litig. v. Credit Lyonnais Rouse, Ltd., 262 F.3d 134, 139-40 (2d Cir. 2001). It is further ORDERED that the petitioners in the case docketed under 15-806 submit, on a monthly basis, a letter updating the Court as to the status of their case.. Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk USCA for the Second Circuit. Issued As Mandate: 08/12/2015. (nd) Modified on 8/14/2015 (nd).

MANDATE

Case 15-792, Document 95, 08/12/2015, 1574485, Page1 of 2

S.D.N.Y.-N.Y.C.
09-cv-118
Marrero, J.

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE

SECOND CIRCUIT
_________________

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square,
in the City of New York, on the 12th day of August, two thousand fifteen.
Present:
Robert A. Katzmann,
Chief Judge,
José A. Cabranes,
Christopher F. Droney,
Circuit Judges.

USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
_________________
DATE FILED: August 12, 2015
______________

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, et al.,
Petitioners,
v.

15-792 (L);
15-806 (Con)

AXA Private Management, et al.,
Respondents.

Petitioners have moved, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), for leave to appeal the
district court’s order granting Respondents’ motion for class certification. Petitioners also have
moved for leave to file replies in support of their petitions. More recently, however, the
Petitioners in the case docketed under 15-806 have moved for their Rule 23(f) petition to be held in
abeyance and for that motion to be sealed.
Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the motions to file replies are GRANTED,
the motion to hold in abeyance the Rule 23(f) petition docketed under 15-806 is GRANTED, and
the motion to seal the preceding motion is GRANTED. The Rule 23(f) petition docketed under
15-792 is DENIED because an immediate appeal is unwarranted. See Sumitomo Copper Litig. v.
Credit Lyonnais Rouse, Ltd., 262 F.3d 134, 139-40 (2d Cir. 2001).

MANDATE ISSUED ON 08/12/2015

Case 15-792, Document 95, 08/12/2015, 1574485, Page2 of 2

It is further ORDERED that the petitioners in the case docketed under 15-806 submit, on a
monthly basis, a letter updating the Court as to the status of their case.
FOR THE COURT:
Catherine O=Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

2