Federal Trade Commission v. Yellowstone Capital LLC
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:20-cv-06023
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Federal Trade Commission v. Yellowstone Capital, Judge Kaplan received defendants’ request to pause discovery while their dismissal motion was considered; the text contains no ruling.
The Federal Trade Commission and the defendants, including Yellowstone Capital LLC, Fundry LLC, Stern, and Reece, are affected by the requested pause in discovery.
What happened
Federal Trade Commission v. Yellowstone Capital LLC concerns defendants’ request to pause discovery in the Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit while the defendants’ motion to dismiss was considered. The letter says the Federal Trade Commission opposed the pause.
The defendants argued that their dismissal motion could eliminate or narrow the case, and that the Federal Trade Commission’s requested discovery was broad, burdensome, and covered several years. They also argued that a short pause would not unfairly harm the Federal Trade Commission because it had received substantial information during its pre-lawsuit investigation.
The letter asks Judge Kaplan to pause all discovery, including initial disclosures and responses to document requests. The provided text is a party’s request, not a court order, and does not state that the court granted or denied the request.
The detailed version
- Federal Trade Commission v. Yellowstone Capital LLC · No. 1:20-cv-06023
- Lewis Kaplan
- Oct. 19, 2020
Background
The provided text is a letter motion submitted on behalf of all defendants in the Federal Trade Commission’s case against Yellowstone Capital LLC and others. The letter, dated October 2, 2020, asks the court to stay—temporarily pause—discovery while the defendants’ motion to dismiss is pending. The text says the Federal Trade Commission did not consent to the requested stay.
Defendants’ arguments
The defendants argued that their motion to dismiss could dispose of all or part of the case. They asserted that the Federal Trade Commission had not alleged a required basis for seeking relief under Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, had not pleaded enough facts to support its three counts or its claims against individual defendants Stern and Reece, and sought remedies that the defendants contended Section 13(b) did not authorize.
The defendants also argued that the discovery would be extensive and costly. According to the letter, the Federal Trade Commission’s allegations could require information concerning thousands of merchants, advertisements, contracts, policies, and billing records dating back to at least 2015. The Federal Trade Commission had served 24 document requests on Yellowstone Capital LLC and Fundry LLC, including requests concerning agents and affiliates.
Finally, the defendants argued that a short stay would not unfairly prejudice the Federal Trade Commission because, during its nearly two-year pre-suit investigation, the agency had received more than 24,000 pages of documents, more than 1,400 audio recordings, and responses to numerous interrogatories and follow-up inquiries.
Requested relief and status
The defendants requested a stay of all discovery, including initial disclosures and their responses to the Federal Trade Commission’s first document requests, until the court decided the motion to dismiss. The provided text does not contain a ruling by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan and does not state whether the stay was granted, denied, or otherwise resolved.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.