Securities and Exchange Commission v. GPL Ventures LLC et al
Filing
100
ORDER granting 99 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. The request is granted. The conference is adjourned to December 1, 2022, at 2:30 p.m. SO ORDERED. Status Conference set for 12/1/2022 at 02:30 PM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 9/19/2022) (jca)
Case
Case1:21-cv-06814-AKH
1:21-cv-06814-AKH Document
Document100
99 Filed
Filed09/15/22
09/19/22 Page
Page11of
of22
The request is granted.
September 15, 2022
Via ECF
Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein
United States District Judge
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007
The conference is adjourned to
December 1, 2022, at 2:30 p.m.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Alvin K. Hellerstein
September 19, 2022
Re: SEC v. GPL Ventures LLC, 21-cv-6814 (AKH) (S.D.N.Y.)
Dear Judge Hellerstein:
Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission respectfully requests that the conference
scheduled for October 13, 2022 be adjourned for four weeks. Counsel for the GPL Parties (GPL
Ventures LLC, GPL Management LLC, Alexander Dillon, and Cosmin Panait) consent to this
request. Counsel for Salvador Rosillo and HempAmericana, Inc. also consent, with the proviso
that counsel’s involvement remains limited to settlement negotiations pending counsel’s motion to
withdraw. Counsel for Caroline Adams and Seaside Advisors, LLC has not responded to an
inquiry concerning their position on the request.
Following the last status conference held on August 11, the Court entered an Order
Regulating Proceedings (ECF No. 95), which, inter alia, indicated that an order of reference to
Magistrate Judge Lehrburger for settlement would be entered as to the GPL Parties and directed
that all conferences be concluded before the next status conference. The settlement conference has
been scheduled for September 28. The Commission and the GPL Parties have been engaged in
settlement discussions, and anticipate that further progress can be reached in those discussions if
the parties have additional time to continue the discussions before proceeding to a settlement
conference. The Commission seeks such additional four weeks to continue to exchange
information with the GPL Parties, to help the Commission and GPL Parties reconcile differences
in the parties’ understanding of the transaction data, and otherwise to continue discussions that
would enable Commission staff to complete its analysis, which could in turn enable the parties to
come to a resolution acceptable to both sides.
Based on the foregoing, holding a settlement conference at this time is premature, given
the ongoing settlement discussions. If the parties have time to continue the discussions, it will at a
minimum narrow the issues to be discussed at a settlement conference, and may even result in an
agreement in principal on terms that Commission counsel can recommend to the Commission such
that a settlement conference may not be necessary at all.
Accordingly, we request that the October 13 status conference be adjourned for four weeks
so that the parties can continue settlement discussions. If the conference is adjourned, the
Commission and the GPL Parties will separately request that the September 28 settlement
conference also be adjourned.
Case
Case1:21-cv-06814-AKH
1:21-cv-06814-AKH Document
Document100
99 Filed
Filed09/15/22
09/19/22 Page
Page22of
of22
Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein
September 15, 2022
Page |2
The Order Regulating Proceedings also provided that the motion to withdraw by counsel
for Defendants Salvador Rosillo and HempAmericana, Inc. would remain pending to permit
counsel to continue settlement discussions with the Commission, and directed the parties to report
on the status of the negotiations before the next conference. The Commission anticipates that the
parties would still be able provide such an update before October 13.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Paul G. Gizzi
Paul G. Gizzi
Senior Trial Counsel
212-336-0077
gizzip@sec.gov
cc (via ECF): All Counsel of Record
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?