OPINION AND ORDER

THOMAS P. GRIESA, District Judge.

In an order issued on June 5, 2015, the court granted partial summary judgment to plaintiffs in thirty-six separate actions. See, e.g., Opinion and Order, NML Capital, Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina, 14-cv-8601 (TPG) (S.D.N.Y.). Plaintiffs in fifteen additional actions, like the plaintiffs just referred to, hold defaulted bonds issued by defendant, the Republic of Argentina, pursuant to a contract known as the 1994 Fiscal Agency Agreement. Plaintiffs in these fifteen actions now move for partial summary judgment, asking the court to rule that the Republic violated, and continues to violate, the pari passu clause of the agreement by issuing and paying on new debts while refusing to pay on plaintiffs' bonds.

The court grants plaintiffs' motions for partial summary judgment in these fifteen actions on the same basis as stated in the June 5 order for the other actions. The Republic has raised the same arguments here as it did prior to the June 5 order, and the court rejects them again. Where necessary, plaintiffs in these fifteen actions have submitted adequate proof of ownership of their bonds, and the Republic offers no new arguments to persuade the court that a different outcome is warranted here. Plaintiffs in these fifteen actions have shown there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

It is hereby declared, adjudged, and decreed in these actions that the Republic violated, and continues to violate, Paragraph (1) (c) of the 1994 Fiscal Agency Agreement.

SO ORDERED.