In Re: Celsius Network LLC

Background

Non-party Daniel A. Frishberg filed a motion asking the court to dismiss an interlocutory appeal and to unseal a complaint on the Bankruptcy Court’s docket. The appeal was brought by Equities First Holdings, LLC and Alexander Christy against Celsius Network Limited. The appeal concerned a Bankruptcy Court order requiring responsive pleadings and a later order denying a motion for clarification.

Motion to dismiss the appeal

Frishberg argued that the appellants’ motion to stay the appeal was frivolous. The court had addressed that stay request in an order dated November 20, 2023, determined that it was not frivolous, and granted it. Because Frishberg’s request to dismiss the appeal rested on the claim that the stay motion was frivolous, the court denied the motion to dismiss the appeal.

Request to unseal the complaint

Frishberg also asked the court to unseal the complaint either entirely or at least for creditors or parties in interest who had signed the protective order. The court explained that its appellate jurisdiction covered the questions presented in the appeal, including the Bankruptcy Court orders identified by the appellants. The question whether the complaint should be unsealed had not been presented in the appeal, and the court found no basis to decide that issue at that time.

The court also stated that pendent appellate jurisdiction—a doctrine allowing review of certain otherwise unappealable issues closely connected to an appealable ruling—did not apply. It found that the sealing question was not inextricably intertwined with whether the Bankruptcy Court properly required responsive pleadings on arbitrable claims, and that reviewing the complaint was not necessary for meaningful review of the appealed orders.

Disposition

The court denied Frishberg’s motion to dismiss the interlocutory appeal and denied his motion to unseal the complaint. The order was signed by United States District Judge Gregory H. Woods.