Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-05409
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Kate Spade New York v. Vinci Brands, Judge Schofield granted ACS’s request to withdraw its dismissal motion and set deadlines for an answer and next-steps letter.
ACS, Case-Mate, and all parties to the case are affected by the deadlines and case-management requirements.
What happened
In Kate Spade New York LLC, et al. v. Vinci Brands LLC, et al., ACS asked to withdraw its motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and to assert claims against Case-Mate. The opinion text includes ACS’s argument that those claims arose from the same events as the existing case.
The court granted ACS’s request to withdraw the motion. It ordered ACS to file an answer and assert any third-party claims against Case-Mate by April 26, 2024. It also ordered all parties to submit a joint letter by April 29 proposing next steps, including a schedule for expected dismissal motions and possible changes to discovery. The court directed the clerk to close the motions at Docket Numbers 152 and 228.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield issued the order on April 22, 2024. The order sets deadlines and manages the case; it does not decide the underlying claims described in the opinion text.
The detailed version
- Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC · No. 1:23-cv-05409
- Lorna Schofield
- Apr. 22, 2024
Background
The order concerns defendant ACS Group Acquisitions LLC, identified in the opinion as ACS. ACS asked to withdraw its motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. ACS also sought to assert third-party claims against Case-Mate, Inc. and CM Brands, LLC, which the opinion collectively calls Case-Mate.
In a letter, ACS argued that its proposed claims arose from the same transactions or occurrences as the existing case and involved common questions of law or fact. ACS also argued that discovery had confirmed alleged wrongful conduct by Case-Mate while Case-Mate was involved in Vinci’s finances and was negotiating to replace Vinci as a Kate Spade licensee. These statements appear in ACS’s submission and are not identified in the order as findings by the court.
Court’s Action
The court granted ACS’s request to withdraw its motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. The court ordered ACS, by April 26, 2024, to file an answer to that complaint and assert any third-party claims against Case-Mate.
The court also ordered all parties to submit a joint letter by April 29, 2024, proposing next steps. The letter must include a proposed schedule for briefing any anticipated motions to dismiss and any proposed changes to the existing discovery schedule. The clerk was directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 152 and 228.
Effect of the Order
This is a case-management order. It does not decide whether ACS’s proposed claims are legally valid, whether Case-Mate is subject to jurisdiction in New York, or who will prevail on the underlying claims. The text does not expressly state whether the court granted a separate request for permissive joinder; it directs ACS to assert any third-party claims against Case-Mate and sets related deadlines.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.