Greentree Financial Group, Inc. v. Chijet Motor Company, Inc.

25-2090 Greentree Financial Group, Inc. v. Chijet Motor Company, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 22nd day of June, two thousand twenty-six.

5 Present: 6 DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, 7 Chief Judge, 8 DENNY CHIN, 9 JOSEPH F. BIANCO, 10 Circuit Judges.

11 _____________________________________ GREENTREE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., 15 Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant, 17 v. 25-2090 EQUINITI TRUST COMPANY, LLC, FKA AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER &TRUST COMPANY, LLC, 22 Defendant-Appellee, CHIJET MOTOR COMPANY, INC., 26 Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee, WEIHENG CAI, 29 Defendant-Counter-Defendant.

31 _____________________________________ For Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant: RORY G. GREEBEL, Beth G. Oliva, Fox Rothschild 2 LLP, New York, NY.

4 Appeal from a decision and order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Caproni, J.).

6 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

8 Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant Greentree Financial Group, Inc. (“Greentree”) appeals from a decision and order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered on July 30, 2025, granting Defendant-Appellee Equiniti Trust Company LLC’s (“Equiniti’s”) motion to dismiss. Greentree brought this breach of contract action against Equiniti and Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee Chijet Motor Company, Inc. (“Chijet”). Equiniti moved to dismiss the amended complaint and Chijet, in answering the amended complaint, asserted a counterclaim against Greentree and Weiheng Cai for breach of fiduciary duty. Greentree moved to dismiss Chijet’s counterclaim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. The district court granted Equiniti’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, construed Greentree’s motion to dismiss as a motion to compel arbitration, and granted that motion, staying the counterclaim while arbitration is pending. Greentree’s claims against Chijet for breach of contract are currently proceeding in the district court.

20 Under the final judgment rule, this Court has appellate jurisdiction only over decisions that are final, subject to several “narrow exceptions.” Transaero, Inc. v. La Fuerza Aerea Boliviana, 99 F.3d 538, 541 (2d Cir. 1996). A decision is final only if it “conclusively determines the pending claims of all the parties to the litigation” and “leav[es] nothing for the court to do but execute its decision.” Mead v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co., 768 F.3d 102, 109 (2d Cir. 2014) (emphasis added) (internal quotation marks omitted). The dismissal order on appeal here is clearly not final, since it does not resolve any of the claims by Greentree against Chijet. Indeed, that litigation remains pending. Because there is no final judgment of the district court, and because the appeal was not certified under either 28 U.S.C. §1292(b) or Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), we DISMISS for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

5 FOR THE COURT: 6 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk