Coach IP Holdings, LLC v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: May 13, 2024
• Docket: 1:23-cv-10612
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------X : COACH IP HOLDINGS, LLC, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : 23 Civ. 10612 (LGS) -against- : : ORDER ACS GROUP ACQUISITION LLC, et al., : Defendants. : : -------------------------------------------------------------X

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: WHEREAS, on May 9, 2024, attorneys from the law firm Debevoise & Plimpton LLP appeared on behalf of Case-Mate, Inc. (“Case-Mate”), a party in three related litigations -- this action and two related actions, Vinci Brands LLC v. Coach Services, Inc., No. 23 Civ. 5138 (LGS), and Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC, No. 23 Civ. 5409 (LGS); WHEREAS, all three actions include claims against Case-Mate relating to Case-Mate’s replacement of Vinci Brands LLC as licensee for certain Coach and Kate Spade products, respectively. All three actions involve substantially similar parties and legal issues; WHEREAS, as detailed in a similar order in the related actions, the parties, including Case-Mate, have actively litigated Case No. 23 Civ. 5138, which now has 365 docket entries since June 16, 2023; WHEREAS, 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) directs a judge to disqualify herself “in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” See also Canon 3C(1) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. WHEREAS, the continued appearance of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP in this action would require the recusal of this Court, “a circumstance that was or should have been known to that firm at the time of its retention.” See In re F.C.C., 208 F.3d 137, 138 (2d Cir. 2000); accord United States v. Navarro, No. $6 20 Crim. 160, 2021 WL 1948346, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 14, 2021). It is hereby ORDERED that the firm of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP shall withdraw its appearance in this matter. See In re F.C.C., 208 F.3d at 139-40 (“As between a judge already assigned to a panel, and a lawyer who thereafter appears in circumstances where the appearance might cause an assigned judge to be recused, the lawyer will go and the judge will stay.”); accord United States v. Khan, 538 F. Supp. 2d 937, 938 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) (“binding Second Circuit precedent” directed withdrawal of attorney on judge’s conflict list). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to strike the appearances of the individual attorneys at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP as counsel of record for Case-Mate. Dated: May 13, 2024 New York, New York .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE