In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation

S.D. New York

In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation

DecidedMarch 7, 2023

Docket1:19-cv-09236

StatusUnknown

This text of In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation (In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

Debevoise Debevoise & Plimpton LLP . 66 Hudson Boulevard & Plimpton New York, NY 10001 +1212 909 6000

March 6, 2023 BY ECF AND EMAIL The Honorable Katherine Polk Failla United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse ers ee MEMO ENDORSED New York, New York 10007 Re: In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation, No. 19 Civ. 9236 (S.D.N.Y.) Dear Judge Failla: We write on behalf of Defendants iFinex Inc., BFXNA Inc., BFXWW Inc., Tether Holdings Limited, Tether Limited, DigFinex Inc., Tether Operations Limited, Tether International Limited, Ludovicus Jan van der Velde, and Giancarlo Devasini (the “B/T Defendants”) to respectfully seek leave to serve an interrogatory on Plaintiffs, pursuant to Local Rule 33.3(b) and Paragraph 6(c) of the Court’s Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 298). The B/T Defendants propose to serve an interrogatory requesting that Plaintiffs identify the wallets they owned or controlled from February 17, 2015 through June 5, 2020 by providing the wallet addresses and/or other identifying account information for their crypto holdings and transactions. The B/T Defendants and the Plaintiffs have conferred and exchanged a series of letters, and the B/T Defendants understand that Plaintiffs will not oppose this motion. (Dkt. No. 307 at 3). An interrogatory is a superior way to seek discovery of wallet addresses — which consist of a long string of letters and numbers — and similar information, as opposed to a request for production of documents or a deposition. See Local Civil Rule 33.3(b)(1) (permitting service of interrogatories “if they are a more practical method of obtaining the information sought than a request for production or a deposition”); In re Weatherford Int’l Secs. Litig., 2013 WL 5788680, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2013) (authorizing interrogatories seeking “discrete” information that would “entail comparatively simple responses rather than long narrative explanations”). The B/T Defendants therefore seek leave to serve the interrogatory attached as Exhibit 1. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Elliot Greenfield

www.debevoise.com

Application GRANTED. The B/T Defendants may serve the interrogatory discussed above and attached as Exhibit 1 to their letter motion on Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 312. Dated: March 7, 2023 SO ORDERED. New York, New York Kathir Palle (flo HON. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Debevoise Debevoise & Plimpton LLP . 66 Hudson Boulevard & Plimpton New York, NY 10001 +1212 909 6000

March 6, 2023 BY ECF AND EMAIL The Honorable Katherine Polk Failla United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse ers ee MEMO ENDORSED New York, New York 10007 Re: In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation, No. 19 Civ. 9236 (S.D.N.Y.) Dear Judge Failla: We write on behalf of Defendants iFinex Inc., BFXNA Inc., BFXWW Inc., Tether Holdings Limited, Tether Limited, DigFinex Inc., Tether Operations Limited, Tether International Limited, Ludovicus Jan van der Velde, and Giancarlo Devasini (the “B/T Defendants”) to respectfully seek leave to serve an interrogatory on Plaintiffs, pursuant to Local Rule 33.3(b) and Paragraph 6(c) of the Court’s Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 298). The B/T Defendants propose to serve an interrogatory requesting that Plaintiffs identify the wallets they owned or controlled from February 17, 2015 through June 5, 2020 by providing the wallet addresses and/or other identifying account information for their crypto holdings and transactions. The B/T Defendants and the Plaintiffs have conferred and exchanged a series of letters, and the B/T Defendants understand that Plaintiffs will not oppose this motion. (Dkt. No. 307 at 3). An interrogatory is a superior way to seek discovery of wallet addresses — which consist of a long string of letters and numbers — and similar information, as opposed to a request for production of documents or a deposition. See Local Civil Rule 33.3(b)(1) (permitting service of interrogatories “if they are a more practical method of obtaining the information sought than a request for production or a deposition”); In re Weatherford Int’l Secs. Litig., 2013 WL 5788680, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2013) (authorizing interrogatories seeking “discrete” information that would “entail comparatively simple responses rather than long narrative explanations”). The B/T Defendants therefore seek leave to serve the interrogatory attached as Exhibit 1. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Elliot Greenfield

www.debevoise.com

Application GRANTED. The B/T Defendants may serve the interrogatory discussed above and attached as Exhibit 1 to their letter motion on Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 312. Dated: March 7, 2023 SO ORDERED. New York, New York Kathir Palle (flo HON. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tether-and-bitfinex-crypto-asset-litigation-nysd-2023.