Plaintiffs in FX rate fixing case oppose DOJ’s request for yet another stay extension

Sourced from: https://financefeeds.com/plaintiffs-fx-rate-fixing-case-oppose-dojs-request-yet-another-stay-extension/

The plaintiffs,”because the victims of these confessed violators of the Antitrust Laws”, argue that the requested stay ought to be denied, and that they need to be permitted to take the depositions of the signatories of the Plea Agreements and the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, and to violate their case in the standard course.
In their response filed on Wednesday, the plaintiffs – customers and end-user businesses alleging they paid Forex rates brought on by an alleged conspiracy among the suspect banks to fix prices of FX benchmark rates, assert the remain extension shouldn’t be allowed.

The post Plaintiffs in FX speed adjusting case oppose DOJ’s request for yet another stay extension appeared initially on FinanceFeeds.
The plaintiffs in a Forex benchmark rate adjusting lawsuit targeting a number of the US leading banks like Citi, HSBC and JPMorgan, have compared the latest request by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to get a detection remain extension. The relevant motion was submitted on July 10, 2019, with all the New York Southern District Court.
Let’s remember that, less than a fortnight before, the DOJ asked a three-month expansion of the restricted discovery stay of particular depositions and interviews in the topic. The Department said that the stay has been necessary given the forthcoming trial and appeal to just two FX-related cases:

The plaintiffs ask that the Court order some time certain in which they may start to take depositions. It has been over three years since the plaintiffs in this event served their very initial Notices of Deposition. According to these, without this kind of Order, the DOJ will simply file each three-months.
Because of such piecemeal stays, the plaintiffs say, it’s been very difficult, if not impossible, to allow them to organize, manage, schedule, or prepare their case against the defendants. As stated by the plaintiffs, the prejudice to them has been manifest, and really used against them suggesting that the stays have postponed the prosecution of the situation.

  • United States v. Johnson, 18-1503-cr, is on appeal to the Second Circuit.
  • FinanceFeeds –

    The plaintiffs note that this is actually the tenth piecemeal remain sought from the DOJ in this circumstance.