Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 828

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz from Richard E. Brodsky dated 2/19/12 re: Counsel writes on behalf of the Standard Chartered Plaintiffs' Steering Committee to request an extension of the period for fact discovery until 5/4/12, on the conditions listed herein. The parties have indicated to each other that they both want to adjust the fact discovery deadline, but do not agree as to the details. ENDORSEMENT: The period of fact discovery in the Standard Chartered Cases, is extended to May 4, 2012. The noticed depositions are subject to objection by the noticed party. ( Fact Discovery due by 5/4/2012.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz on 3/2/2012) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:09-cv-00118-VM-THK et al. (as per Chambers)(mro) Modified on 3/6/2012 (mro).

11:03
E.

Brodsky

01/1~/IL L~l r~

To:Hon. Theodore H. Katz (11118051932)

RICHARD

E. 13RODSKY

ATTOR~'EY AT LAW

THE BRODSKY LAW FIR.'>I

66 'VEST FLAGLER STREET

MIA:\fl. FLORIDA 33130

REB@;THEBRODSICLI_~'YFIR:\l.CO~I

786-220-3328

Via Facsimile
Hon. Theodore H. Katz
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007-1312
Re:

Anwar v. Fairfield Greenwich, etc.

09-cv-118-VM

Standard Chartered Cases

Dear Judge Katz:
This letter is sent on behalf of the Standard Chartered Plaintiffs'
Steering Committee.
Paragraph 7 of the Second Amended Scheduling Order Regarding
Standard Chartered Cases states, DE 609, states, in pertinent part:
All fact discovery in the Standard Chartered Cases shall be
completed within the period set forth for the completion of fact
discovery in the Anwar Action, i.e., March 2, 2012. In the event
that the period set forth for the completion of fact discovery in
the Anwar Action is extended, the Standard Chartered
Defendants and the Steering Committee, after meeting and
conferring with each other, may jointly or individually seek
leave of the Court for a parallel extension in the Standard
Chartered Cases.
The parties have indicated to one another that they bo~h want to
adjust the discovery deadline, but they disagree as to details.i We understand
that the Defendants may be submitting their own letter setting forth their

~

.

Fax - Richard E. Brodsky

To:Hon. Theodore H. Katz (12128057932)

22:04 02/19/12 EST Pg 3-4

Hon. Theodore H. Katz
February 19, 2012
Page 2

position. This letter outlines our position and the reasons we believe that the
Court should approve our requests.
We request that the Court order an extension of the period for fact
discovery until Friday, May 4, 2012, on the following conditions:
1.
All documents heretofore agreed or ordered to be produced shall
be produced by Mal'ch 2, 2012.

Parties may notice depositions to occur through and including
2.
May 4, 2012, provided that the Defendants and individual Plaintiffs may
agree, subject to the Court's approval, to alternative arrangements with
respect to depositions of specific individual Plaintiffs or affiliates thereof. The
notices may be issued before or after March 2, 2012.
Additional written discovery may be served after March 2, 2012,
3.
subject to objection by the party on whom discovery served.
As to Point 1, documents are still to be produced by both various
Plaintiffs and the Defendants. The purpose of asking for an order requiring
that all parties produce, by March 2, 2012, all documents agreed or ordered to
be produced is to set a firm deadline for production, so that the other parties
can analyze and review them and utilize them during remaining depositions.
As to Point 2, all parties should be entitled to issue notices of
deposition after March 2, 2012, because it likely that documents will be
produced on or before March 2 that will suggest the need for additional
witnesses' depositions, and depositions taken after March 2 may likewise
reveal the need for additional witnesses' depositions. Preventing notices of
deposition from being issued after March 2 would serve no purpose other
than placing an artificial barrier in the way of discovery of relevant facts -­
artificial beca-use there would be nothing sacrosanct about March 2, 2012
once the original deadline is extended.

As to Point 3, the parties should also be permitted to propound written
discovery after March 2, 2012, for the same reasons that we outline above, in
reference to the noticing of depositions after March 2.
In summary, the Plaintiffs request that the Court order an extension of
the period for fact discovery until Friday, May 4, 2012, on the following
conditions:

From: Richard Brodsky

Fax: (888) 391·5819

To: Hon. Theodore H. Katz Fax: [phone]·7932

Page 7 of 7 2122/20123:14

Hon. Theodore H. Katz

February 19, 2012
Page 3

~

,A

, Wt¥/~

1k J~(

-;;~71< £)e/./ ;t: ~ £J.;:F,i;I ~J-.(I /:2­
i.. /
~

I
.
•
1.
All documents heretofore agreed or ordered to e
be produced by ~larch 2, 2012.

produce~)

-;JtJ

,

2.
Parties may notice depositions to occur through and including
lVlay 4, 2012, provided that the Defendants and individual Plaintiffs may
agree, subject to the Court's approval, to alternative arrangements with
respect to depositions of specific individual Plaintiffs or affiliates thereof. The
notices may be issued before or after March 2, 2012. 7k. ~ . ....J1./L.~~ ~

/-,.

---r~

-r

3.
Additional written discovery may be served after March 2, 2012,
j',
.--Tr
subject to objection by the party on whom discovery is served.
~ V ~;""'1The Plaintiffs sincerely appreciate the Court's attention to this matter.
Sincerely yours,

Richard E. Brodsky
On behalf of the Standard
Chartered Plaintiffs' Steering
Committee

cc:

'on Nelles, Esq.
laintiffs' counsel

HEODORE H. KATZ
";
UNlTED STAlES MAG\STRATE JUDe..

'v. 1k/

~

/a-r(7'