Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC; Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al.; Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al.

S.D. New York

Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC; Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al.; Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al.

DecidedDecember 2, 2025

Docket1:23-cv-05409

StatusUnknown

This text of Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC; Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al.; Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al. (Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC; Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al.; Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al.) 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

Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC; Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al.; Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al., (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

| M LAZARE POTTER GLAZER & MOYLE LLP 747 THIRD AVE, FLOOR 16 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 T: 212.758.9300 LPGMLAW.COM

Dated: December 2, 202 The Honorable Valerie Figueredo Daniel Patrick Moynihan Courthouse The motion to seal is GRANTED. The United State District Court Clerk of the Court is respectfully 500 Pearl Street, Room 1660 directed to close the motion at ECF No. New York, New York 10007 608.

Re: Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC, No. 23-cv-05409: ACS Group Acquisitions LLC’s Letter Motion to Seal the Declaration of Anna Pia D. Felix, dated December 1, 2025, and Exhibit A Attached Thereto

Dear Judge Figueredo: This firm, Lazare Potter Glazer & Moyle LLP (“LPGM” or the “Firm’’), represents ACS Group Acquisitions LLC (“ACS”) in the above-referenced action. We write, pursuant to Rule I.g.2. of Your Honor’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases, to respectfully request an order sealing the Declaration of Anna Pia D. Felix, dated December 1, 2025 (the “Felix Declaration’’) in support of the Firm’s motion to withdraw as counsel for ACS and Exhibit A attached thereto. Based upon the authority cited below, LPGM respectfully requests the Court grant this letter motion to seal. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Firm is counsel to ACS in this action, as well as the actions styled Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al. Case No. 23-cv-5138 (“5138”), and Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al., Case No. 23-cv-10612 (“Coach’’) (collectively, the “Related ACS Cases”). LPGM seeks to withdraw as counsel for ACS in this action and the Related ACS Cases. In support of its motion to withdraw, LPGM submitted the Felix Declaration and Exhibit A attached thereto. The Felix Declaration contains confidential and attorney-client privileged information, the contents of which should be sealed.

December I, 2025 Page 2 of 2 I. ARGUMENT “It is appropriate for a Court considering a counsel’s motion to withdraw to consider in camera submissions in order to prevent a party from being prejudiced by the application of counsel to withdraw.” Weinberger v. Provident Life and Cas. Ins. Co., No. 97 Civ. 9262 (JIGK), 1998 WL 898309, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 1998). “[D]ocuments in support of motions to withdraw as counsel are routinely filed under seal where necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship between a party and its counsel...” Team Obsolete Ltd. v. A.H.R.M.A. Ltd., 464 F. Supp.2d 164, 165 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (refusing to unseal affidavit in support of motion to withdraw as counsel that was properly submitted in camera, where the affidavit pertained to a fee dispute and opposing counsel would not be prejudiced by the court’s in camera review of the affidavit); see also Committee Note to Local Civil Rule 1.4. Sealing motions to withdraw as counsel is permitted where “necessary to preserve the higher values of confidentiality of the attorney- client relationship between a party and its counsel.” Russo v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 22- cv-03130 (VR), 2025 WL 2393533, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 30, 2025) (granting request to seal motion to withdraw as counsel); Vick ex rel. Vinco Ventures, Inc. v. Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd., 240CV000446 (JGLC) (KHP), 2024 WL 967773, at * (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 4, 2024) (declining to unseal motion to withdraw as counsel to protect “attorney-client confidences’’). Here, the Felix Declaration and Exhibit A attached thereto reveal confidential and attorney-client privileged information, the revelation of which would prejudice ACS. The contents of the Felix Declaration include the same attorney-client confidences that this Court is permitted to protect through a sealing order. Further, opposing counsel is not prejudiced by the Court’s in camera review of LPGM’s submission. Tl. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Lazare Potter Glazer & Moyle LLP respectfully requests that the Court grant this letter motion to seal the Declaration of Anna Pia D. Felix and Exhibit A attached thereto. We thank the Court for its continued assistance in this matter.

Respectfully Submitted,

Anna Pia D. Felix cc: All Counsel

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

| M LAZARE POTTER GLAZER & MOYLE LLP 747 THIRD AVE, FLOOR 16 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 T: 212.758.9300 LPGMLAW.COM

Dated: December 2, 202 The Honorable Valerie Figueredo Daniel Patrick Moynihan Courthouse The motion to seal is GRANTED. The United State District Court Clerk of the Court is respectfully 500 Pearl Street, Room 1660 directed to close the motion at ECF No. New York, New York 10007 608.

Re: Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC, No. 23-cv-05409: ACS Group Acquisitions LLC’s Letter Motion to Seal the Declaration of Anna Pia D. Felix, dated December 1, 2025, and Exhibit A Attached Thereto

Dear Judge Figueredo: This firm, Lazare Potter Glazer & Moyle LLP (“LPGM” or the “Firm’’), represents ACS Group Acquisitions LLC (“ACS”) in the above-referenced action. We write, pursuant to Rule I.g.2. of Your Honor’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases, to respectfully request an order sealing the Declaration of Anna Pia D. Felix, dated December 1, 2025 (the “Felix Declaration’’) in support of the Firm’s motion to withdraw as counsel for ACS and Exhibit A attached thereto. Based upon the authority cited below, LPGM respectfully requests the Court grant this letter motion to seal. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Firm is counsel to ACS in this action, as well as the actions styled Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al. Case No. 23-cv-5138 (“5138”), and Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al., Case No. 23-cv-10612 (“Coach’’) (collectively, the “Related ACS Cases”). LPGM seeks to withdraw as counsel for ACS in this action and the Related ACS Cases. In support of its motion to withdraw, LPGM submitted the Felix Declaration and Exhibit A attached thereto. The Felix Declaration contains confidential and attorney-client privileged information, the contents of which should be sealed.

December I, 2025 Page 2 of 2 I. ARGUMENT “It is appropriate for a Court considering a counsel’s motion to withdraw to consider in camera submissions in order to prevent a party from being prejudiced by the application of counsel to withdraw.” Weinberger v. Provident Life and Cas. Ins. Co., No. 97 Civ. 9262 (JIGK), 1998 WL 898309, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 1998). “[D]ocuments in support of motions to withdraw as counsel are routinely filed under seal where necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship between a party and its counsel...” Team Obsolete Ltd. v. A.H.R.M.A. Ltd., 464 F. Supp.2d 164, 165 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (refusing to unseal affidavit in support of motion to withdraw as counsel that was properly submitted in camera, where the affidavit pertained to a fee dispute and opposing counsel would not be prejudiced by the court’s in camera review of the affidavit); see also Committee Note to Local Civil Rule 1.4. Sealing motions to withdraw as counsel is permitted where “necessary to preserve the higher values of confidentiality of the attorney- client relationship between a party and its counsel.” Russo v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 22- cv-03130 (VR), 2025 WL 2393533, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 30, 2025) (granting request to seal motion to withdraw as counsel); Vick ex rel. Vinco Ventures, Inc. v. Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd., 240CV000446 (JGLC) (KHP), 2024 WL 967773, at * (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 4, 2024) (declining to unseal motion to withdraw as counsel to protect “attorney-client confidences’’). Here, the Felix Declaration and Exhibit A attached thereto reveal confidential and attorney-client privileged information, the revelation of which would prejudice ACS. The contents of the Felix Declaration include the same attorney-client confidences that this Court is permitted to protect through a sealing order. Further, opposing counsel is not prejudiced by the Court’s in camera review of LPGM’s submission. Tl. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Lazare Potter Glazer & Moyle LLP respectfully requests that the Court grant this letter motion to seal the Declaration of Anna Pia D. Felix and Exhibit A attached thereto. We thank the Court for its continued assistance in this matter.

Respectfully Submitted,

Anna Pia D. Felix cc: All Counsel

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kate Spade LLC v. Vinci Brands LLC; Vinci Brands LLC, et al. v. Coach Services, Inc., et al.; Coach IP Holdings, LLC, et al. v. ACS Group Acquisition LLC, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kate-spade-llc-v-vinci-brands-llc-vinci-brands-llc-et-al-v-coach-nysd-2025.