GOLDMAN et al v. CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC. et al

Filing 61

ORDER of MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION (ECF NO. 60) that. JUDITH AND KENNETH GOLDMAN'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (ECF NO. 56) IS GRANTED; CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC AND BARRY GUARIGLIA'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION (ECF NO. 43) IS GRANTED. ACCORDINGLY, JUDITH AND KENNETH GOLDMAN'S REFILED MOTION TO VACATE (ECF NO. 42) AND MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (ECF NO. 58) ARE BOTH DENIED; JUDITH AND KENNETH GOLDMAN'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF NO. 50) IS DENIED.1(footnote). SIGNED BY HONORABLE ANITA B. BRODY ON 5/19/2015. 5/19/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES VIA ECF.(mo, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JUDITH GOLDMAN and KENNETH B. GOLDMAN Plaintiffs, v. CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC.; BARRY GUARIGLIA; FINRA; and FREDERICK PIERONI, Defendants. : : : : : CIVIL ACTION No. 12-4469 : ORDER AND NOW, this ____19th__ day of May 2015, it is ORDERED as follows:  Judith and Kenneth Goldman’s Motion for Leave to Provide Supplemental Authority (ECF No. 56) is GRANTED.  Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Barry Guariglia’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (ECF No. 43) is GRANTED. Accordingly, Judith and Kenneth Goldman’s Refiled Motion to Vacate (ECF No. 42) and Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 58) are both DENIED.  Judith and Kenneth Goldman’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (ECF No. 50) is DENIED.1 1 The Goldmans seek to amend their complaint to assert the same claims they unsuccessfully brought in their arbitration before FINRA. In support of their motion to amend, they cite FINRA Rule 12206. See Mot. for Leave to File Am. Compl. At 3-4, ECF No. 50. That rule, however, only applies when the claims in the underlying arbitration are dismissed for being untimely. “Where six years have elapsed from the occurrence or event giving rise to the claim,” and a defendant successfully moves to dismiss on that ground, “the non-moving party may withdraw any remaining related claims without prejudice and may pursue all of the claims in court.” FINRA Rule 12206, available at http://finra.complinet.com/en/display/display_main.html?rbid=2403&element_id=4112. Defendants did not claim in the underlying arbitration that the Goldmans’ claims were untimely, and the arbitration panel s/Anita B. Brody ____________________________________ ANITA B. BRODY, J. Copies VIA ECF on _________ to: Copies MAILED on _______ to: accordingly dismissed the Goldmans’ claims on the merits. See Mot. to Dismiss, for Expungement, and for Atty’s Fees, ECF No. 51-3; Arbitration Award, ECF No. 42-2.

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?