The information contained on this web page is only a summary of information presented in more detail in the Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement, November 10, 2016 Hearing Thereon, And Settlement Class Members’ Rights (the “Notice”), which you can access by clicking here. Since this website is just a summary, you should review the Notice and Settlement Agreements for additional details.
Your Legal Rights Could Be Affected Whether You Act Or Do Not Act. Please Read The Notice Carefully.
IF YOU TRANSACTED IN EUROYEN-BASED DERIVATIVES BETWEEN JANUARY 1, 2006 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, INCLUSIVE, (THE “CLASS PERIOD”), YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO A PAYMENT FROM A CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT.
IMPORTANT DATES AND DEADLINES
SUBMIT A PROOF OF CLAIM
Postmarked no later than January 24, 2017
Postmarked no later than October 6, 2016
OBJECT TO THE SETTLEMENT
Served on Class Counsel and all counsel for the Citi Defendants and HSBC Defendants no later than October 11, 2016 and filed with the Court no later than October 11, 2016
November 10, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Courtroom 11A.
Any change by the Court of the Plan of Allocation, the time and place of the Final Approval Hearing, or any other matter and all further orders or requirements by the Court will be posted on this website as soon as practicable.
It is important that you refer to this website as no other notice may be published of such changes.
What is this case about?
Plaintiffs allege that each Defendant, between January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011, inclusive, manipulated or aided and abetted the manipulation of Yen-LIBOR, Euroyen TIBOR, and the prices of Euroyen-Based Derivatives. Defendants allegedly did so by using several means of manipulation. For example, panel banks that made the daily Yen-LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR submissions to the British Bankers’ Association and Japanese Bankers Association (the “Contributor Bank Defendants”), such as the Citi Defendants and HSBC Defendants, allegedly falsely reported their cost of borrowing in order to financially benefit their Euroyen-Based Derivatives positions. Contributor Bank Defendants also requested that other Contributor Bank Defendants make false Yen-LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR submissions on their behalf to benefit their Euroyen-Based Derivatives positions.
Plaintiffs further allege that inter-dealer brokers, intermediaries between buyers and sellers in the money markets and derivatives markets (the “Broker Defendants”), such as the R.P. Martin Defendants, had knowledge of, and provided substantial assistance to, the Contributor Bank Defendants’ foregoing alleged manipulations of Euroyen-Based Derivatives in violation of 22(a)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. § 25(a)(1). For example, Contributor Bank Defendants used the Broker Defendants to manipulate Yen-LIBOR, Euroyen TIBOR, and the prices of Euroyen-Based Derivatives by disseminating false “Suggested LIBORs,” publishing false market rates on broker screens, and publishing false bids and offers into the market.
Plaintiffs have asserted legal claims under various theories, including federal antitrust law, the Commodity Exchange Act, the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and common law.
The Citi Defendants, HSBC Defendants, and R.P. Martin Defendants have consistently and vigorously denied Plaintiffs’ allegations.
What are Euroyen-Based Derivatives?
“Euroyen-Based Derivatives” means (i) a Euroyen TIBOR futures contract on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”); (ii) a Euroyen TIBOR futures contract on the Tokyo Financial Exchange, Inc. (“TFX”), Singapore Exchange (“SGX”), or London International Financial Futures and Options Exchange (“LIFFE”) entered into by a U.S. Person, or by a Person from or through a location within the U.S.; (iii) a Japanese Yen currency futures contract on the CME; (iv) a Yen-LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR based interest rate swap entered into by a U.S. Person, or by a Person from or through a location within the U.S.; (v) an option on a Yen-LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR based interest rate swap (“swaption”) entered into by a U.S. Person, or by a Person from or through a location within the U.S.; (vi) a Japanese Yen currency forward agreement entered into by a U.S. Person, or by a Person from or through a location within the U.S.; and/or (vii) a Yen-LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR based forward rate agreement entered into by a U.S. Person, or by a Person from or through a location within the U.S.
The Settlement Benefits
A. Settlements with the Citi Defendants and HSBC Defendants
On behalf of the Settlement Class, Plaintiffs entered into the Citi Settlement Agreement with the Citi Defendants on August 11, 2015. On behalf of the Settlement Class, Plaintiffs entered into the HSBC Settlement Agreement with the HSBC Defendants on June 16, 2016. The following description of the proposed settlements is only a summary. This description and this Notice are qualified in their entirety by the Citi Settlement Agreement and HSBC Settlement Agreement which are available by clicking the “Court Documents” link on the left.
1. The Citi Defendants’ and HSBC Defendants’ Payments for the Benefit of the Settlement Class
a. No Right to Reversion
The Citi Settlement Agreement and HSBC Settlement Agreement do not provide the Citi Defendants or HSBC Defendants with a right of reversion. That is, no matter how many Settlement Class Members ultimately fail to file a Proof of Claim or opt-out, if the Citi Settlement and HSBC Settlement are finally approved by the Court, none of the Citi Settlement monies or HSBC Settlement monies will revert to Citi Defendants or HSBC Defendants.
b. The Citi and HSBC Defendants’ Potential Right To Termination
Sections 21 and 23 of the Citi Settlement Agreement describe the Citi Defendants’ right to terminate if certain conditions anticipated by the parties are not satisfied. With respect to each such condition, the Citi Defendants have the right (as qualified in the Citi Settlement Agreement), but not the obligation, to determine to exercise, in their sole discretion, a termination notice if the condition is not satisfied.
Sections 21 and 23 of the HSBC Settlement Agreement describe the HSBC Defendants’ right to terminate if certain conditions anticipated by the parties are not satisfied. With respect to each such condition, the HSBC Defendants have the right (as qualified in the HSBC Settlement Agreement), but not the obligation, to determine to exercise, in their sole discretion, a termination notice if the condition is not satisfied.
c. Proposed Plan of Allocation
The Proposed Plan of Allocation is available for review under the “Plan of Allocation” link on the left. The daily artificiality matrix, as described in the Proposed Plan of Allocation, will be posted on or before thirty days prior to the opt-out deadline. Changes, if any, to the daily artificiality matrix based on newly available data or information will be promptly posted.
B. Settlement with the R.P. Martin Defendants
On behalf of the Class, Plaintiffs entered into the R.P. Martin Settlement Agreement with the R.P. Martin Defendants on December 3, 2014. The following description of the proposed settlement is only a summary. This description and this entire Notice are qualified in their entirety by the R.P. Martin Settlement Agreement which is available by clicking the “Court Documents” link on the left.
1. The Consideration Provided by the R.P. Martin Defendants for the Benefit of the Class
Pursuant to the terms of the R.P. Martin Settlement Agreement, the R.P. Martin Defendants have agreed to provide the following cooperation to Plaintiffs’ Counsel for the benefit of the Class.
The R.P. Martin Defendants agreed to provide a full account of all known facts relating to the allegations set forth in the Actions and to produce the following: (i) all audio tapes of voice brokerage communications; (ii) all transaction data reflecting trades of Euroyen-Based Derivatives; (iii) all documents relied on and/or created in connection with internal investigations performed by or at the request of the R.P. Martin Defendants; and (iv) all transcripts, notes, compilations, or recordings of any interviews or depositions of former and/or current R.P. Martin employees. The R.P. Martin Defendants also agreed to make any individual within their control that is knowledgeable about the alleged manipulation available for interview with Plaintiffs’ Counsel.
The R.P. Martin Settlement Agreement does not settle or compromise any claims other than those set out therein. All rights of the Plaintiffs or any Settlement Class Member against any other person or entity other than the parties released in the R.P. Martin Settlement Agreement are specifically reserved by the Plaintiffs and the Members of the Class.
The Rights of Class Members
If you are a member of the Class, you have the following options:
Submit a Proof of Claim
As a Settlement Class Member, you may be entitled to share in the Net Settlement Fund if you submit a valid and timely Proof of Claim demonstrating that you are an Authorized Claimant as set forth in the Citi Settlement Agreement and the HSBC Settlement Agreement. Proofs of Claim must be postmarked to the Settlement Administrator (see address in VIII below) no later than January 24, 2017. A copy of the Proof of Claim can be found here.
An important aspect of the Settlement is that the Defendants are not entitled to any reversion. Thus, shares of Settlement Class Members who fail to file a Proof of Claim will be redistributed to Settlement Class Members who do file Proofs of Claim and who do qualify for payment as described in the Plan of Allocation. Settlement Class Members are encouraged to file Proofs of Claim.
Exclude yourself from the Settlement
To exclude yourself from the Settlement Class for the Settlement Agreements, you must submit a written request that clearly states: (i) the name, address, and telephone number of the Settlement Class Member; (ii) a list of all trade names or business names that the Settlement Class Member requests to be excluded; (iii) the name of the Actions (“Laydon v. Mizuho Bank, Ltd., et al., No. 12-cv-3419 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y.) and Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd. et al. v. UBS AG et al., No. 15-cv-5844 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y.)”); (iv) a statement certifying such person is a Settlement Class Member; and (v) a statement that “I/we hereby request that I/we be excluded from the Settlement Class in Laydon v. Mizuho Bank, Ltd., et al., No. 12-cv-3419 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y.) and Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd. et al. v. UBS AG et al., No. 15-cv-5844 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y.).” All written requests must be signed by the Settlement Class Member (or his, her or its Legally Authorized Representative) and notarized, even if the Settlement Class Member is represented by counsel.
Requests for exclusion from the Settlement Class for the Settlement Agreements must be sent by First-Class mail (preferably certified mail) to the Settlement Administrator (see address below). Requests for exclusion must be postmarked no later than October 6, 2016.
If you exclude yourself from the Settlement Class for the Settlement Agreements, you will not be bound by the Settlement Agreements and can independently pursue claims you may have against the Citi Defendants, HSBC Defendants, and/or the R.P. Martin Defendants at your own expense. You may also enter an appearance through an attorney if you so desire. However, if you exclude yourself from the Settlement Agreements, you will not be eligible to share in the Net Settlement Fund.
Object to the Settlement
Any objections to the proposed Settlements, Plan of Allocation, the application for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses or any other matter must be served on Class Counsel and all Counsel for the Citi Defendants and HSBC Defendants in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice no later than October 11, 2016 and also must be filed with the Court no later than October 11, 2016.
The Court’s Settlement Hearing
The Court has scheduled a Final Approval Hearing for November 10, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. to be held at the United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, Courtroom 11A. At the Final Approval Hearing, the Court will determine, among other things, if the proposed Settlements are fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court will also consider Class Counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of litigation expenses, and Plaintiffs’ Incentive Award.
The time and date of the Final Approval Hearing may be continued from time to time without further notice and you are advised to confirm the time and location if you wish to attend; as soon as practicable after any change in the scheduled date and time, such change will be posted to this website.
The information provided on this website and in the Notice summarizes the proposed Settlements. For more details regarding the Settlements, please reference the Settlement Agreements, and other important documents filed in the case under the “Court Documents” link on the left. You may also contact the Settlement Administrator or Class Counsel for further information regarding the Settlements:
c/o A.B. Data, Ltd.
PO Box 170500
Milwaukee, WI 53217
Geoffrey M. Horn
Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart, P.C.
1 North Broadway, Suite 509
White Plains, NY 10601-2310
Commodities Brokers and other Nominees: Please visit the Institutional E-Filing page of this website
If you have questions, you may call the Euroyen Settlement Help Line at
866-217-4453, or email firstname.lastname@example.org.