UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. Brutus Trading, LLC v. Standard Chartered Bank, et al.

Filing 120

ORDER terminating 112 Letter Motion for Conference re: 112 LETTER MOTION for Conference re: 101 MOTION to Vacate . addressed to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer from Patrick M.McSweeney dated 101., 119 FIRST MOTION to Disqualify Counsel Jean-David Barnea. ; with respect to 119 Motion to Disqualify Counsel. The motion for a pre-motion conference, and the proposed motion itself, appears to be transparent bids to delay this litigation by unnecessarily h ampering the Government's response to the pending motion to vacate. Although the Court doubts that Brutus Trading can meet the high "standard of proof" required for motions to disqualify, which are "disfavored" and recognized as "often interposed for tactical reasons" and as "inevitably caus[ing] delay" even when made in good faith, Pagan v. CI Lobster Corp., 549 F. Supp. 3d 356,359 (S.D.N.Y. 2021), the Court will permit such a motion to be made, and adopts the joint briefing schedule proposed. The Government's response to the disqualification motion is due July 15. Brutus Trading's reply, if any, is due July 22. The Government's response to the motion to appoint an independent exp ert will be due 14 days after the Court decides the disqualification motion. Brutus Trading's reply, if any, will be due 7 days after that. The Government's response to the motion to vacate will be due 14 days after the Court decides the motion to appoint an independent expert. Brutus Trading's reply, if any, will be due 7 days after that. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 7/8/2024) (tg)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. BRUTUS TRADING, LLC, -v- Plaintiff, 18 Civ. 11117 (PAE) ORDER STANDARD CHARTERED BANK, STANDARD CHARTERED PLC, and STANDARD CHARTERED TRADE SERVICES CORPORATION, Defendants. PAUL A. ENGELMA YER, District Judge: Brutus Trading LLC ("Brutus Trading"), the relator in this qui tam action, in connection with its motion to vacate, seeks a pre-motion conference regarding its motion to disqualify Assistant United States Attorney Jean-David Barnea and its potential motion to appoint an expert. See Dkt. 112, 119. The Court rejects the request for a pre-motion conference. The motion for a pre-motion conference, and the proposed motion itself, appears to be transparent bids to delay this litigation by unnecessarily hampering the Government's response to the pending motion to vacate. 1 Although the Court doubts that Brutus Trading can meet the high "standard of proof" required for motions to disqualify, which are "disfavored" and recognized as "often interposed for tactical reasons" and as "inevitably caus[ing] delay" even when made in good faith, Pagan v. CI Lobster Corp., 549 F. Supp. 3d 356,359 (S.D.N.Y. 2021), the Court will permit such a The Court notes that it has already denied Brutus Trading's earlier request to reopen the case. See Dkt. 97 (Opinion); Dkt. 99 (Second Circuit affirmance). 1 motion to be made, and adopts the joint briefing schedule proposed. The Government's response to the disqualification motion is due July 15. Brutus Trading's reply, if any, is due July 22. The Government's response to the motion to appoint an independent expert will be due 14 days after the Court decides the disqualification motion. Brutus Trading' s reply, if any, will be due 7 days after that. The Government's response to the motion to vacate will be due 14 days after the Court decides the motion to appoint an independent expert. Brutus Trading's reply, if any, will be due 7 days after that. SO ORDERED. Dated: July 8, 2024 New York, New York 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?