Kraus USA, Inc. v. Magarik et al

Filing 185

ORDER terminating 181 Letter Motion for Local Rule 37.2 Conference. Kraus USA, Inc. ("Plaintiff") brought this action against Sergio Magarik, Vonn, LLC, Leonid Valdberg, Vigo Industries, LLC, and Nigel Challenger (collectively "Defendants") on August 28, 2017. Doc. 1. The Court assumes familiarity with the facts and procedural posture of this action as previously set forth in its May 12, 2020 Opinion and Order. Doc. 166. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed it s amended complaint on May 22, 2020 and Defendants answered on June 4, 2020. Docs. 168 170. On August 6, 2020, the parties attended a telephonic conference before the Court regarding several outstanding discovery disputes, which were des cribed in Defendants' letters dated July 21, August 5, and August 6, 2020, and Plaintiff's letters dated July 23 and August 4, 2020. At the conclusion of the conference, having heard both parties, the Court directed Plaintiff to r espond to the arguments Defendants set forth in their most recent letter of August 6, 2020 requesting a premotion conference, Doc. 183, by August 11, 2020, in advance of the parties' next telephonic conference before the Court on August 14, 2020 at 11:30AM. The parties will call the Court using the following conference call information: (877) 411-9748; Access Code: 3029857#. In addition, Plaintiff and Defendants are both directed to respond to each other's document demands by August 20, 2020. Finally, Plaintiff's oral motion to quash Defendants' subpoenas to Bank of America and Bank Hapoalim is granted. Both subpoenas are quashed without prejudice. The Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate the letter motion at Doc. 181. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 8/6/2020) (mro)

Download PDF
Case 1:17-cv-06541-ER Document 185 Filed 08/06/20 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK KRAUS USA, INC., Plaintiff, v. ORDER SERGIO MAGARIK a/k/a SERGEI MAGARIK, VONN, LLC a/k/a VONN LIGHTING, LLC d/b/a VONN LIGHTING, LEONID VALDBERG, VIGO INDUSTRIES, LLC, and NIGEL CHALLENGER, 17 Civ. 6541 (ER) Defendants. RAMOS, D.J. Kraus USA, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) brought this action against Sergio Magarik, Vonn, LLC, Leonid Valdberg, Vigo Industries, LLC, and Nigel Challenger (collectively “Defendants”) on August 28, 2017. Doc. 1. The Court assumes familiarity with the facts and procedural posture of this action as previously set forth in its May 12, 2020 Opinion and Order. Doc. 166. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed its amended complaint on May 22, 2020 and Defendants answered on June 4, 2020. Docs. 168 170. On August 6, 2020, the parties attended a telephonic conference before the Court regarding several outstanding discovery disputes, which were described in Defendants’ letters dated July 21, August 5, and August 6, 2020, and Plaintiff’s letters dated July 23 and August 4, 2020. At the conclusion of the conference, having heard both parties, the Court directed Plaintiff to respond to the arguments Defendants set forth in their most recent letter of August 6, 2020 requesting a premotion conference, Doc. 183, by August 11, 2020, in advance of the parties’ next telephonic conference before the Court on August 14, 2020 at 11:30 AM. The Case 1:17-cv-06541-ER Document 185 Filed 08/06/20 Page 2 of 2 parties will call the Court using the following conference call information: (877) 411-9748; Access Code: 3029857#. In addition, Plaintiff and Defendants are both directed to respond to each other’s document demands by August 20, 2020. Finally, Plaintiff’s oral motion to quash Defendants’ subpoenas to Bank of America and Bank Hapoalim is granted. Both subpoenas are quashed without prejudice. The Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate the letter motion at Doc. 181. It is SO ORDERED. Dated: August 6, 2020 New York, New York _______________________ Edgardo Ramos, 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?