Hiteks Solutions, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A.
- James Oetken
- 1:25-cv-00200
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hiteks Solutions v. Citibank, Judge Oetken granted Citibank leave to withdraw and refile its arbitration motion only if it reimburses Hiteks.
Citibank may withdraw and refile its motion to compel arbitration only if it reimburses Hiteks for the attorney’s fees and costs Hiteks spent opposing the original motion. The order also sets filing deadlines for either option.
What happened
Hiteks Solutions, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A. concerns Citibank’s request to withdraw a motion asking the court to require arbitration and file a corrected motion instead. Citibank made the request after Hiteks had already opposed the original motion and after Citibank’s deadline for filing a reply.
The court granted Citibank leave to withdraw and refile its motion only if Citibank reimburses Hiteks for the attorney’s fees and costs Hiteks spent opposing the original motion. If Citibank withdraws the motion, it must file the new motion by May 16, 2025; otherwise, it may rely on the original motion and file its reply by that date.
Judge J. Paul Oetken managed the briefing schedule and did not decide whether arbitration should be compelled. The order addresses only Citibank’s request to withdraw and refile its motion and sets the next filing deadlines.
The detailed version
- Hiteks Solutions, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A. · No. 1:25-cv-00200
- James Oetken
- May 12, 2025
Background
On March 25, 2025, the court set a schedule for Citibank’s anticipated motion to compel arbitration, which is a request that the court require the dispute to be resolved through arbitration. Citibank filed the motion, and Hiteks filed its opposition. Instead of filing its reply, Citibank submitted an April 24, 2025 letter asking to withdraw its original motion and file a corrected motion identifying an earlier agreement to arbitrate. Hiteks opposed that request.
Court’s reasoning
The court relied on district courts’ inherent authority and responsibility to manage their dockets so cases proceed in an orderly and timely way. It stated that, given the stage of the briefing and Citibank’s forfeiture of reliance on the prior arbitration agreement in its motion, Citibank could withdraw and refile only if it reimbursed Hiteks for the attorney’s fees and costs Hiteks incurred opposing the original motion.
Order and deadlines
The court granted Citibank leave to withdraw and refile its motion to compel arbitration on the reimbursement condition. If Citibank chooses that option, it must file the new motion by May 16, 2025; Hiteks must respond by May 30, 2025; and Citibank must reply by June 6, 2025. If Citibank instead relies on its original motion, it must file a reply supporting that motion by May 16, 2025. The order does not decide the merits of whether arbitration should be compelled.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.