Securities and Exchange Commission v. Illarramendi, 3:11cv78 (JBA). (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Connecticut
Number: infdco20180406853
Visitors: 5
Filed: Mar. 29, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 29, 2018
Summary: RULING ON RAMON ILLARRAMENDI'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF FINAL JUDGMENT AND SETTLEMENT IN HIS COMPANY'S NAME, REQUEST FOR A STAY AND OTHER RELATED RELIEF [DOC. # 1104] JANET BOND ARTERTON , District Judge . By Motion dated September 26, 2017, non-party Ramon Illarramendi seeks reconsideration of the September 8, 2017 final judgment against Highpoint Partners, LLC and Michael Kenwood Capital Management, LLC and the relief Defendants. In addition to being filed outside the required seven
Summary: RULING ON RAMON ILLARRAMENDI'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF FINAL JUDGMENT AND SETTLEMENT IN HIS COMPANY'S NAME, REQUEST FOR A STAY AND OTHER RELATED RELIEF [DOC. # 1104] JANET BOND ARTERTON , District Judge . By Motion dated September 26, 2017, non-party Ramon Illarramendi seeks reconsideration of the September 8, 2017 final judgment against Highpoint Partners, LLC and Michael Kenwood Capital Management, LLC and the relief Defendants. In addition to being filed outside the required seven d..
More
RULING ON RAMON ILLARRAMENDI'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF FINAL JUDGMENT AND SETTLEMENT IN HIS COMPANY'S NAME, REQUEST FOR A STAY AND OTHER RELATED RELIEF [DOC. # 1104]
JANET BOND ARTERTON, District Judge.
By Motion dated September 26, 2017, non-party Ramon Illarramendi seeks reconsideration of the September 8, 2017 final judgment against Highpoint Partners, LLC and Michael Kenwood Capital Management, LLC and the relief Defendants. In addition to being filed outside the required seven day period (D. Conn. L. Civ.R. 7(c)(1)), Mr. Illarramendi's motion lacks merit and he lacks standing to seek this relief. The Final Judgment entered does not affect Mr. Illarramendi's claims. The cases which he cites in support of his claim of change in controlling law are inapposite. Further, his claim based on his theory of ownership has been rejected as unsupported by evidence by the Court [Doc. # 1121] in its approval of the Receiver's denial of Mr. Illarramendi's two creditor claims. In addition, the Court has previously rejected arguments for reconsideration of the PDVSA claims and finds no basis to revisit those rulings.
Mr. Illarramendi further seeks a stay of the Final Judgment and Settlement, but fails to show a likelihood of merits success, that he will suffer irreparable harm without a stay, that issuance of a stay would not substantially injury other interested parties, or that the public interest lies in an issuance of a stay.
Accordingly, Ramon Illarramendi's Motion is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle