In RE Lottery.com, Inc. Securities Litigation
- Rochon
- 1:22-cv-07111
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In In re Lottery.com Securities Litigation, Judge Rochon allowed amended complaints after guilty pleas, including a pro se plaintiff’s filing within one week.
Class Plaintiffs, Harold Hoffman, and the defendants in the Lottery.com securities litigation.
What happened
In In re Lottery.com, Inc. Securities Litigation, Class Plaintiffs asked to file a Fifth Amended Complaint after Defendants Clemenson and Dickinson pleaded guilty to securities fraud. Harold Hoffman, who was representing himself, separately asked to file an amended pleading within one week after the Class Plaintiffs’ filing.
The court said amended pleadings should generally be allowed when fairness requires it. Because the defendants did not object and the new allegations could help the court address the guilty pleas when considering expected requests to dismiss the case, the court found no reason to reject the amendment.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted Plaintiffs’ request to file an amended complaint and allowed Hoffman to file his complaint within one week after the Class Plaintiffs’ amended pleading. The Class Plaintiffs must file their Fifth Amended Complaint within 14 days, and the parties must then discuss a schedule for the defendants’ response.
The detailed version
- In RE Lottery.com, Inc. Securities Litigation · No. 1:22-cv-07111
- Rochon
- June 16, 2025
Background
On May 29, 2025, Class Plaintiffs asked for permission to file a Fifth Amended Complaint based on Defendants Clemenson’s and Dickinson’s guilty pleas to securities fraud. On June 13, 2025, Harold Hoffman, proceeding without a lawyer, asked for permission to file an amended pleading within one week after the Class Plaintiffs filed theirs.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) says that courts should freely allow amendments when justice requires. The court identified possible reasons to deny amendment, including undue delay, bad faith, repeated failure to correct earlier deficiencies, undue prejudice to the opposing party, or futility. The defendants did not object to further amendment.
Ruling
The court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file an amended complaint. It found that amendment would promote judicial efficiency by allowing the court to consider allegations concerning the criminal guilty pleas when resolving anticipated motions to dismiss. The court also permitted Hoffman to file his complaint within one week after the Class Plaintiffs filed their amended pleading.
The court directed Class Plaintiffs to file a Fifth Amended Complaint within 14 days of the order. After that filing, the parties must meet and discuss a schedule for the defendants’ response. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate docket entries 237 and 240.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.