Advanced Analytics, Inc. v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.

Background

Advanced Analytics submitted a letter responding to the court’s July 11, 2025 order concerning defendants’ anticipated application for attorney’s fees. The letter addressed defendants’ request to submit quarter-by-quarter summaries rather than detailed billing records.

Advanced Analytics argued that Paragraph 21 of the parties’ nondisclosure agreement permits only “reasonable attorneys’ fees.” It also relied on Second Circuit precedent requiring fee applications to include contemporaneous records identifying, for each attorney, the date, hours spent, and nature of the work. Advanced Analytics contended that ordinary administrative burdens, including the volume of records and redaction of privileged material, did not justify departing from that requirement.

Advanced Analytics also asserted that defendants’ litigation conduct—including alleged obstruction, concealment, and production of spoliated or fabricated records—made close review of any fee request necessary. The letter reserved Advanced Analytics’s right to seek relief related to that alleged misconduct but stated that it was not requesting such relief or a hearing at that time.

Court’s Action

The court directed the parties to meet and confer to determine whether they could resolve the issue without court intervention. If they could not, defendants were directed to submit a reply by August 1, 2025.

The court noted that case law suggests a prevailing party may recover reasonable fees and expenses incurred in preparing a successful attorney-fee motion. It expressly stated that it was only noting that authority for purposes of the parties’ discussions and was not deciding whether the authority applied in this case. The order concluded, “DE # 525 is resolved.” It did not grant or deny Advanced Analytics’s requested fee-record requirements or decide whether defendants were entitled to attorney’s fees.