H. Daya International Co., Ltd. v. DO Denim, LLC
- Freeman
- 1:16-cv-08668
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In H. Daya International Co., Ltd. v. DO Denim, LLC, Judge Freeman’s filing records a motion seeking Star Funding’s subpoena compliance and contempt.
Non-party Star Funding, Inc. is the target of the requested subpoena enforcement and contempt relief; the Siskind Defendants seek that relief and related fees. The provided text does not show the effect of any court ruling.
What happened
H. Daya International Co., Ltd. v. DO Denim, LLC concerns a notice of motion by R. Siskind & Company, Inc., Vintage Apparel Group LLC, and Richard Siskind, identified as the Siskind Defendants. They sought relief against non-party Star Funding, Inc., which they said had not responded to a subpoena.
The motion asks the court to hold Star Funding in contempt, compel it to respond within one week, require a sworn certification describing its searches for responsive documents, and award the Siskind Defendants their attorneys’ fees and expenses. The notice also says the Siskind Defendants tried to resolve the dispute with Star Funding.
The document does not clearly state a ruling on the motion. Judge Debra C. Freeman is identified as the magistrate judge before whom the motion would be presented.
The detailed version
- H. Daya International Co., Ltd. v. DO Denim, LLC · No. 1:16-cv-08668
- Freeman
- Dec. 4, 2019
Background
The provided document is a notice of motion, not a clearly stated decision on the motion. Defendants R. Siskind & Company, Inc., Vintage Apparel Group LLC, and Richard Siskind—the “Siskind Defendants”—filed the notice against non-party Star Funding, Inc. The Siskind Defendants said Star Funding had failed to respond to a subpoena served on April 5, 2019.
Requested relief
Under Rules 37(a) and 45(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court’s inherent authority, the Siskind Defendants asked the court to:
- hold Star Funding in contempt for failing to respond to the subpoena; - order Star Funding to respond within one week after the hearing or decision on the motion; - require Star Funding to file and serve a sworn certification stating that it had made diligent and reasonable efforts to search for responsive documents; - award the Siskind Defendants the attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in bringing the motion; and - grant any other relief the court deemed proper.
The notice also states that the Siskind Defendants certified they had attempted in good faith to confer with Star Funding but had not resolved the dispute. It directed Star Funding to submit an opposition within seven days after service of the motion papers under Local Civil Rule 6.1.
Disposition
The provided text does not clearly show whether Judge Debra C. Freeman granted, denied, or otherwise resolved the motion. Accordingly, it does not establish a ruling on contempt, subpoena enforcement, certification, or fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.