Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 30, 2025

Elco Securities, LTD v. Dear Cashmere Holdings, Inc.

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:23-cv-05008
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
SecuritiesCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Elco Securities v. Dear Cashmere Holdings, Judge Moses vacated deadlines and ordered a motion seeking approval of settlement-related stock issuance.

Who this affects

Elco Securities, LTD, Dear Cashmere Holdings, Inc., and the proposed recipients of the shares were affected. The parties had to file the required joint motion, and proposed security recipients were entitled to appear at the later hearing.

What happened

Elco Securities, LTD v. Dear Cashmere Holdings, Inc. involved a dispute that the parties had settled in principle. The settlement included issuing unrestricted-trading shares of Dear Cashmere Holdings common stock to Elco Securities, LTD or its designees.

The court vacated all previously set deadlines. It ordered the parties to file a joint motion by June 6, 2025, asking the court to approve the stock issuance as exempt from registration under Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933.

The motion must include the signed settlement agreement, supporting declarations or affidavits addressing fairness to Elco, a legal memorandum, and a proposed order. Judge Barbara Moses stated that the court would schedule the required hearing after receiving the motion; the order did not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Elco Securities, LTD v. Dear Cashmere Holdings, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-05008
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
May 30, 2025

Background

The parties reported that they had settled their dispute in principle. The proposed settlement included issuing “free trading” shares of Dear Cashmere Holdings, Inc. common stock to plaintiff Elco Securities, LTD and/or its designees. The parties also consented to the jurisdiction of the designated magistrate judge for the remaining proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

Order

The court vacated all deadlines previously set in the action. It ordered the parties to submit, by June 6, 2025, a joint motion requesting an order under Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77c(a)(10), approving the issuance of the Dear Cashmere shares as exempt from registration under the Act.

The court required the motion to include a fully executed copy of the settlement agreement, redacted as needed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2; one or more declarations or affidavits showing that issuing and delivering the shares would be fair to Elco; a memorandum of law; and a proposed order. After receiving the motion, the court stated that it would schedule the hearing required by Section 3(a)(10). The order noted that all people to whom the securities were proposed to be issued would have the right to appear at that hearing.

Disposition and Significance

The court entered an administrative and settlement-related order: it vacated the existing deadlines and ordered the parties to file the specified joint motion. It did not rule on the merits of the underlying dispute or finally approve the share issuance in this order. Judge Barbara Moses signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.