In re Pareteum Securities Litigation
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:19-cv-09767
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Pareteum Securities Litigation: Pareteum sought a stay; no court ruling appears in the text, and Judge Hellerstein is identified as judge.
The requested stay would affect Pareteum Corporation, the lead plaintiff, the individual defendants, Squar Milner, LLP, Dawson James Securities, Inc., and the further proceedings in this securities litigation. The text does not show whether the stay was ordered.
What happened
In In re Pareteum Securities Litigation, Defendant Pareteum Corporation asked the court to pause the remaining proceedings, including scheduling deadlines and related hearings. The requested stay would not cover settlement-related motions involving Squar Milner, LLP.
Pareteum cited an ongoing government investigation and its difficult financial condition, including liquidity constraints and efforts to consider strategic alternatives. The motion said the parties had been mediating and believed a stay could preserve limited resources, including insurance assets. The motion was unopposed by the lead plaintiff and the other listed defendants.
The provided text does not include a ruling on the motion, so it does not show whether the stay was granted or denied. Judge Alvin Hellerstein is identified as the judge.
The detailed version
- In re Pareteum Securities Litigation · No. 1:19-cv-09767
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Feb. 10, 2022
Document and requested relief
The provided text is an unopposed motion filed by Defendant Pareteum Corporation. Pareteum asks the court to stay, meaning pause, further proceedings in the case. The requested stay would include the remaining deadlines in the scheduling order and hearings related to those deadlines, but would exclude settlement-related motion practice concerning Defendant Squar Milner, LLP.
Reasons given for the requested stay
The motion states that a stay is justified by two circumstances: an ongoing government investigation related to the subject of the litigation and Pareteum’s precarious financial condition. According to the motion, Pareteum had been exploring strategic alternatives to address ongoing liquidity constraints. The parties had also been participating in mediation, but the motion says those two circumstances had hindered the mediation.
The motion states that a stay could preserve scarce resources, including liability-insurance assets, while the parties awaited more information about the government investigation and Pareteum’s financial condition. It also states that the parties would report the status of the case within 90 days after entry of an order staying the proceedings.
Positions of the parties
The motion states that the lead plaintiff did not oppose the requested stay. It also states that Individual Defendants Robert H. Turner, Edward O’Donnell, Victor Bozzo, and Denis McCarthy, as well as Squar Milner, LLP and Dawson James Securities, Inc., did not oppose it. Pareteum separately planned to seek the same stay in a related case, and the plaintiff in that case also did not oppose the request.
Court action shown in the text
The provided text does not contain an order granting or denying the motion, a signed disposition, or other stated ruling by Judge Alvin Hellerstein. Accordingly, the text establishes only that Pareteum requested a stay and that the request was unopposed; it does not establish that the proceedings were actually stayed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.