IN RE HELIOS AND MATHESON ANALYTICS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
- John Koeltl
- 1:18-cv-06965
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 16
In re Helios and Matheson Analytics, Inc. Securities Litigation: Judge Koeltl directed plaintiffs to respond to correspondence about a rejected claim.
The claimant whose proof of claim was rejected, the plaintiffs, and the settlement-claims administration process.
What happened
In In re Helios and Matheson Analytics, Inc. Securities Litigation, a claimant asked the court to review the rejection of a proof of claim seeking payment from a securities-settlement fund. The claimant said documentation showed purchases and a later sale of the company’s stock, but the claims administrator said the claim did not produce a recognized loss under the court-approved allocation plan.
The court did not decide whether the claim was eligible for payment or whether the administrator correctly applied the allocation plan. Instead, it directed the plaintiffs to file a response to the attached correspondence by December 27, 2021.
Judge John G. Koeltl issued the order on December 14, 2021. The order’s disposition was limited to requiring a response; it did not grant or deny the claimant’s request for review.
The detailed version
- IN RE HELIOS AND MATHESON ANALYTICS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 1:18-cv-06965
- John Koeltl
- Dec. 15, 2021
Background
The court received correspondence concerning a notice that a proof of claim had been rejected. The attached letter, from Paul O’Malley, asked the court to review the full rejection of his claim. The letter stated that he had submitted documentation concerning purchases of Helios and Matheson Analytics, Inc. stock and a later sale, and that the claims administrator had informed him that the claim did not calculate to a recognized loss under the court-approved plan of allocation.
The claims administrator’s email stated that the claim was ineligible for payment from the settlement fund because it did not calculate to a recognized loss. It also stated that the claimant could request court review by explaining the challenge and providing supporting documentation.
Court’s action
Judge John G. Koeltl directed the plaintiffs to file a response to the attached correspondence by December 27, 2021. The order did not decide whether the proof of claim qualified for payment, did not determine the amount of any recognized loss, and did not rule on the claimant’s request for review. The opinion text also does not state a final disposition of the claim itself.
Read the full 16-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.