SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. v. Arcesium LLC
- Reif
- 1:22-cv-02009
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In SS&C Technologies v. Arcesium, Judge Reif ordered supplemental briefing on how a Supreme Court decision affects vacating a dismissal.
The parties in the case: SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc., Advent Software, Inc., and Arcesium LLC.
What happened
SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. and Advent Software, Inc. sued Arcesium LLC in the Southern District of New York. The order concerns the parties’ earlier briefing about a motion to vacate a dismissal.
After the Supreme Court decided BLOM Bank SAL v. Honickman, the court allowed the parties to file additional briefs. The briefs may address how that decision affects the legal rules for vacating a dismissal to permit an amended complaint and how those rules apply here.
Judge Timothy M. Reif ordered the supplemental briefs to be filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on June 26, 2025. The briefs may not exceed 5,000 words and should not repeat earlier arguments; the order did not decide the motion to vacate.
The detailed version
- SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. v. Arcesium LLC · No. 1:22-cv-02009
- Reif
- June 12, 2025
Background
SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc. and Advent Software, Inc. are the plaintiffs and counterclaim defendants. Arcesium LLC is the defendant and counterclaim plaintiff. The order refers to prior briefing concerning a motion to vacate a dismissal, but it does not describe the underlying claims or the earlier dismissal in detail.
Court’s Action
Following the Supreme Court’s June 5, 2025, decision in BLOM Bank SAL v. Honickman, the court permitted the parties to file supplemental briefing. The parties may address two issues: how BLOM Bank affects the legal framework for vacating a dismissal to allow amendment of a complaint, and how that post-BLOM Bank framework applies to the specific facts of this case.
The court directed that the briefs be filed with the Clerk by 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on Thursday, June 26, 2025. Each brief is limited to 5,000 words and must not repeat or restate arguments already made in the parties’ prior briefing on the motion to vacate. The order does not grant or deny the motion to vacate.
Judge and Court
Judge Timothy M. Reif, a Judge of the United States Court of International Trade, issued the order while sitting by designation in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.