Phoenix Fashion, Inc. v. Saadia Group LLC

USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: Sanne KK DATE FILED:_02/03/2025 PHOENIX FASHION, INC., : Plaintiff, : : 23-cv-5788 (LJL) -v- : : MEMORANDUM AND SAADIA GROUP LLC; NEW YORK & COMPANY : ORDER STORES, INC.; FASHION TO FIGURE ECOMM LLC; : LORD & TAYLOR ECOMM LLC; YAKOUB N : SAADIA a/k/a YAKOUV SAADIA a/k/a YAKAOUB :: SAADIA a/k/a YAKOUV SAABIA a/k/a JACK : SAADIA; NY AND CO ECOMM LLC; LETOTE : ECOMM LLC; AQUATALIA ECOMM LLC; FASHION : TO FIGURE IP LLC; RTW RETAILWINDS : ACQUISITION LLC; LORD & TAYLOR : ACQUISITIONS LLC; LORD & TAYLOR IP LLC; : LETOTE IP LLC; AQUATALIA IP LLC; 501 JERSEY: AVENUE LLC; BROOK WAREHOUSING AND : DISTRIBUTION LLC; 1735 JERSEY AVENUE : PROPERTY LLC; SAADIA DISTRIBUTION LLC; : STONY BATTERY RD PROPERTY OWNER LLC; : 1000 STONEY BATTERY ROAD, LLC, : Defendants. : LEWIS J. LIMAN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff-appellee Phoenix Fashion, Inc. (“Phoenix Fashion”) moves, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(b)(3)(C), for an order directing that defendant-appellant Yakoub N. Saadia a/k/a Yakouv Saadia a/k/a Yakaoub Saadia a/k/a Yakouv Saabia a/k/a Jack Saadia (“Saadia”) order transcripts of the following proceedings to be added to the record on appeal: (a) 9/16/2024 case management conference; and (b) 10/9/2024 telephone conference for hearing on Plaintiff's motion for a default judgment. Dkt. No. 237. The motion is granted.

Saadia appeals a default judgment entered by this Court on December 3, 2024. Dkt. No. 235. The two transcripts that Phoenix Fashion seeks to have added to the record are critical to understanding this Court’s judgment. On September 16, 2024, the Court heard the parties on Saadia’s motion to vacate the entry of default and, after concluding that the default was not willful, also ruled that Saadia had advanced no meritorious defense to the vast majority of the damages sought and had prejudiced Phoenix Fashion by repeatedly delaying the action, causing Phoenix Fashion to lose priority to other creditors. Dkt. No. 221. The Court therefore ordered that the entry of default be vacated only upon the posing of a bond. Dkt. No. 221 at 3; see Dkt.

No. 223 at 5. On October 9, 2024, the Court head from the parties regarding Phoenix Fashion’s motion for a default judgment. After hearing from the parties, the Court issued a memorandum and order holding that Phoenix Fashion was entitled to a default judgment. Dkt. No. 223 at 5.

The proceedings on September 16, 2024, and October 9, 2024, included argument relevant to the Court’s decision to enter default judgment and are necessary to enable “meaningful appellate review” of that decision. Wrighten v. Glowski, 232 F.3d 119, 120 (2d Cir. 2000).

The request for attorney’s fees for bringing the FRAP 10(b)(3)(C) motion is denied.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 237.

SO ORDERED. fs Dated: February 3, 2025 el WA on New York, New York LEWIS J. LIMAN United States District Judge