BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 45 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New ...

10-04285-brl Doc 127 Filed 08/17/12 Entered 08/17/12 14:29:55 Main Document
Pg 127 of 133
interest in liquidating insolvent U.S. debtors consistent with the policies in the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code”); Eclaire, 375 F. Supp. 2d at 265 (denying dismissal for forum non conveniens because,
“[a]mong other things, the United States clearly has an interest in this dispute as it involves a
U.S. trustee acting on behalf of a U.S. creditor trust created by a U.S. court seeking to recover
unpaid U.S. loans”). The U.S. interest in the Trustee’s recovery and redistribution efforts is
paramount and outweighs Luxembourg’s interest in regulating Luxalpha’s activities. This factor,
therefore, weighs heavily against litigating this adversary proceeding in Luxembourg.
b. There Are No Difficult Problems in Conflict of Laws or the
Application of Foreign Law
The Trustee has neither asserted claims under foreign law nor raised any other issues of
foreign law to be determined by this Court. Conflict of laws is simply a non-issue, and Luxalpha
cannot overcome this reality with its vague assertion that “questions regarding duties owed by
the various parties involved and their roles with the funds will surely require an interpretation of
foreign laws and regulations.” (See Luxalpha Mot. at 22.)
Luxalpha’s assertion regarding foreign “anti-discovery laws and bank secrecy statutes” is
similarly unavailing. (See id.) First, courts in this district are well-versed with issues of foreign
blocking and secrecy statutes. See, e.g., Reino De Espana v. Am. Bureau of Shipping, No. 03 Civ
3573, 2005 WL 1813017 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 1, 2005); British Int’l Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Seguros La
Republica, S.A., No. 90 Civ. 2370, 2000 WL 713057 (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 2, 2000); Gucci Am., Inc. v.
Curveal Fashion, No. 09 Civ. 8458, 2010 WL 808639 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2010); Ssangyong
Corp. v. Vida Shoes Int’l, Inc., No. 03 Civ. 5014, 2004 WL 1125659 (S.D.N.Y. May 20, 2004).
Such statutes, even if applicable, would not pose difficult problems for this Court.
Second, Luxalpha has not identified any specific foreign statute that may affect this
litigation. Nor has Luxalpha identified any relevant information or documents that would be
107