
    Pasha S. ANWAR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FAIRFIELD GREENWICH LIMITED, et al., Defendants.
    Nos. 09 Civ. 0118(VM), 10 Civ. 8727 (Lou-Martinez).
    United States District Court, S.D. New York.
    June 27, 2012.
    
      Christopher Lovell, Victor E. Stewart, Jody Krisiloff, Lovell Stewart Halebian Jacobson LLP, David A. Barrett, Howard L. Vickery, II, Susan E. Klock, Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP, William M. O’Connor, Crowell & Moring LLP, New York, NY, Adam S. Deekinger, Eli Justin Glasser, Jonathan Edgar Pollard, Sashi Bach Boru-chow, Stuart Harold Singer, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Fort Lauderdale, FL, for Plaintiffs.
    Mark Geoffrey Cunha, Michael Joseph Chepiga, Paige Elizabeth Fleming, Paul Jacob Sirkis, Peter Eric Kazanoff, Philip A. Mirrer-Singer, Sara Ann Ricciardi, Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett LLP, David Scott Hoffner, Dechert, LLP, Adam K. Grant, Daniel R. Benson, Daniel J. Fetter-man, Marc E. Kasowitz, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, Mark P. Goodman, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, Eliot Lauer, Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle, LLP, Andrew M. Genser, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY, Jennie Boehm Krasner, Dechert, LLP, Princeton, NJ, Amanda McGovern, Anisley Tarragona, Annette Urena, Dyanne Eyce Feinberg, Catherine Whitfield, Elizabeth A. Izquierdo, John T. Houchin, Joshua Daniel Clark, Lewis Nathan Brown, Terence Michael Mullen, Gilbride Heller & Brown P.A, Miami, FL, Amy E. Crawford, Brenton Rogers, Emily Nicklin, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL, for Defendants.
   DECISION AND ORDER

VICTOR MARRERO, District Judge.

In a Decision and Order dated November 2, 2011 (the “November 2011 Order”), see Anwar v. Fairfield Greenwich Ltd., 826 F.Supp.2d 578 (S.D.N.Y.2011), the Court dismissed the claims of plaintiffs Moisés Lou-Martinez and Wong Yuk Hing De Lou (together, the “Lous”) for breach of fiduciary duty and gross negligence because those claims were “not supported by any factual allegations in the complaint.” Id. at 592. The Court granted “leave to replead upon a request by Plaintiffs with sufficient new factual allegations and particulars plausibly showing how such re-pleading would correct the deficiencies identified in the Court’s findings, and thus would not be futile.” Id. at 594.

In a letter-brief dated November 22, 2011 (Docket No. 758), the Lous sought leave to replead a breach of fiduciary duty claim predicated on allegations that defendant Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited (“SCBI”) (1) made an unauthorized trading investment in the Fairfield Sentry Fund (“Sentry”), and (2) failed to conduct adequate due diligence into and post-investment monitoring of Sentry. SCBI responded in a letter-brief dated December 2, 2011 (Docket No. 898).

Upon consideration of the November 2011 Order and the parties’ letter-briefs, the Court finds no grounds to grant the Lous’ request to replead. In their letter, the Lous have failed to highlight any new factual allegations that would cure the deficiencies the Court recognized in the November 2011 Order. The Lous continue to allege that SCBI made an unauthorized investment on their behalf in Sentry, which, as the Court held in the November 2011 Order, does not support an allegation for breach of fiduciary duty. Moreover, before the Court issued the November 2011 Order, the Lous voluntarily dismissed their claim based on the alleged unauthorized investment in Sentry, and the November 2011 Order did not grant the Lous permission to seek to replead that claim.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the Lous’ request for leave to re-plead is hereby DENIED.

SO ORDERED.  