Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 26, 2024

In re Romeo Power Inc. Securities Litigation

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:21-cv-03362
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
9
SecuritiesCivil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In re Romeo Power Inc. Securities Litigation: Judge Schofield ordered additional disputed claimants to respond and provide class-membership documents.

Who this affects

The additional disputed claimants, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ counsel, and the administration of the settlement funds are affected. The additional claimants must respond by December 6, 2024, and provide documents supporting their claimed settlement-class membership.

What happened

In re Romeo Power Inc. Securities Litigation concerns a motion by Plaintiffs to distribute settlement funds and deny two disputed claims. The Court had previously ordered disputed claimants to respond by December 6, 2024.

Plaintiffs’ counsel asked whether that earlier order also covered additional claimants who sought to challenge rejected claims. The order does not decide whether any claimant belongs to the settlement class or whether any claim should be paid.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that the November 22 order also applies to the additional disputed claimants. Those claimants must respond by December 6, 2024, and provide Plaintiffs’ counsel with documents supporting their claimed settlement-class membership.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
In re Romeo Power Inc. Securities Litigation · No. 1:21-cv-03362
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Nov. 26, 2024

Background

Plaintiffs moved for distribution of settlement funds and denial of two disputed claims. On November 22, 2024, the Court ordered the disputed claimants to respond to the motion by December 6, 2024, and directed Plaintiffs to notify them of that order.

Plaintiffs’ counsel then asked the Court to clarify whether the November 22 order also applied to additional claimants who had sought to dispute the rejection of their claims. The correspondence attached to the order refers to Tessa Dixon and Guru Singh, although the materials contain a spelling variation for Singh’s first name. Plaintiffs’ counsel stated that these additional claimants had not timely requested Court review and were not included in the motion.

Court’s Action

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that the November 22, 2024, order also applies to the additional disputed claimants. If those claimants wish to continue pressing their claims, they must respond to the motion by December 6, 2024. By the same date, they must also provide Plaintiffs’ counsel with any documents they possess supporting their claims of settlement-class membership.

The order does not decide the merits of the disputed claims, determine whether the additional claimants are settlement-class members, or order distribution of funds.

The authoritative version

Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.