Kashef et al v. BNP Paribas SA et al

Filing 505

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION granting 417 Motion to Certify Class. Plaintiffs' motion to certify the class is granted for the reasons described in the transcript of the oral argument held on May 7, 2024, and as provided below. The class is defined as follows: All refugees or asylees admitted by the United States who formerly lived in Sudan or South Sudan between November 1997 and December 2011. The common questions for trial are the f ollowing:a. Whether the Government of Sudan persecuted class members, or caused them to have reasonable fear of persecution, because of their race, religion, or ethnicity between November 1997 and December 2011.b. Whether the BNP Paribas Defendan ts ("BNPP") consciously aided, abetted,and enabled the Government of Sudan to carry out such acts and as further set forth in this Order. The Court finds that the class, estimated to be over 23,000 individuals, is sufficiently numerous suc h that joinder is impracticable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(l). The foregoing questions are common to the class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2). Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims and defenses with respect to the class under Fed. R. C iv. P. 23(a)(3). The nineteen plaintiffs in this action will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). The following issues also shall be addressed by the parties:a. Identification of the procedure t o provide the "best notice that is practicable under the circumstances" to members of the class, including how they can be identified, how to send individual notices, and how to give adequate notice to those who cannot be identified. See F ed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). The parties also shall propose dates and procedures to be accomplished before the Final Pre-Trial Conference and class trial. Plaintiffs are to serve their proposals on Defendants by May 17, 2024. If the parties agree , the court shall be advised by joint submission by May 21, 2024. If there is disagreement, they are to be addressed in separate briefs by May 23, 2024, and in replies by May 28, 2024.b. The parties shall brief the question, whether determinations of refugee and asylee status by USCIS or other immigration determinations as to the same are 1) admissible, 2) presumptive, or 3) binding on all class members and BNPP, filing their respective briefs on May 21, 2024, and their replies by May 28,2024.The parties shall appear for a status conference on June 11, 2024 at 2:30 p.m. The Clerk shall terminate the open motion at ECF No. 417.SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 5/9/24) (yv)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTIUCT OF NEW YORI<.
--------------------------------------------------------------- X

ENTESAR OSMAN KASHEF, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR
CLASS CERTIFICATION

-againstBNP PARIBAS SA, a French corporation; and
B.N.P. Paribas US Wholesale Holdings, Corp. (f/k/a
BNP Paribas North America, Inc.), a Delaware
corporation,

16 Civ. 3228 (AKH)

Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------------------- X

ALVINK. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J.:
Plaintiffs' motion to certify the class is granted for the reasons described in the
transcript of the oral argument held on May 7, 2024, and as provided below.
I. The class is defined as follows: All refugees or asylees admitted by the United States who
formerly lived in Sudan or South Sudan between November 1997 and December 2011.
2. The common questions for trial are the following:
a. Whether the Goverrunent of Sudan persecuted class members, or caused them
to have reasonable fear of persecution, because of their race, religion, or
ethnicity between November 1997 and December 2011.
b. Whether the BNP Paribas Defendants ("BNPP") consciously aided, abetted,
and enabled the Government of Sudan to carry out such acts.

1

c. Whether BNPP !mew or should have known that its aiding, abetting, and
enabling would contribute to the Sudanese government's campaign of
persecution.
d. Whether such acts ofBNPP proximately caused the forcible displacement of
members of the class from their homes and property, and other injuries to be
tried in individual cases.
c. Other issues ancillmy to the issues above.
3. The Court finds that the class, estimated to be over 23,000 individuals, is sufficiently
numerous such thatjoinder is impracticable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(l). The foregoing
questions are common to the class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2). Plaintiffs' claims are
typical of the claims and defenses with respect to the class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3).
The nineteen plaintiffs in this action will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the .
class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4).
4. Questions oflaw or fact common to class members, as described above, predominate over
questions affecting individual members, and a class action is the superior method to fairly
and efficiently adjudicate these claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). Although each
individual member has an interest in prosecuting their own damages claims, and success with
regard to the class issues may required them to do so, proceeding by a class action should
substantially shorten individual trials and avoid inconsistent determinations.
5. The combination of common and individual trials will be manageable using procedural
techniques common to class and aggregate actions. See Alvin K. Hellerstein et al., The 9/1 I
Litigation Database: A Recipe for Judicial Management, 60 Wash. U. L. Rev. 653 (2013).
2

6. The following issues also shall be addressed by the parties:
a. Identification of the procedure to provide the "best notice that is practicable
under the circumstances" to members of the class, including how they can be
identified, how to send individual notices, and how to give adequate notice to
those who cannot be identified. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). The parties
also shall propose dates and procedures to be accomplished before the Final
Pre-Trial Conference and class trial. Plaintiffs are to serve their proposals on
Defendants by May 17, 2024. lfthe parties agree, the court shall be advised
by joint submission by May 21, 2024. If there is disagreement, they are to be
addressed in separate briefs by May 23, 2024, and in replies by May 28, 2024.
b. The parties shall brief the question, whether determinations of refugee and
asylee status by USCIS or other immigration determinations as to the same are
1) admissible, 2) presumptive, or 3) binding on all class members and BNPP,
filing their respective briefs on May 21, 2024, and their replies by May 28,
2024.
7. The parties shall appear for a status conference on June 11, 2024 at 2:30 p.m.
8. The Clerk shall terminate the open motion at ECF No. 417.

SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 9, 2024
New York, New York
United States Distri_ct Judge

3