# Elghossain v. Bank Audi S.A.L. > District Court, S.D. New York · September 29, 2023 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10354843 ## Case - **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York - **Decided:** September 29, 2023 - **Opinion:** 100trialcourt - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10354843 ## Opinion text UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GEORGE S. ELGHOSSAIN, and MONA C. ELGHOSSAIN, ORDER Plaintiffs, 21 Civ. 2162 (PGG) (BCM) - against - BANK AUDI S.A.L., BANQUE DU LIBAN, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10, Defendants. PAUL G. GARDEPHE, U.S.D.J.: Pro se Plaintiffs George S. Elghossain and Mona C. Elghossain bring this action against Bank Audi S.A.L. (“Bank Audi”), Banque du Liban, and John and Janes Does 1-10, alleging civil conspiracy, fraud, breach of contract, conversion, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (“RICO”). (See Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) FJ 259-400) Defendant Bank Audi has moved to dismiss, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), 12(b)(6), and the forum non conveniens doctrine. (See Bank Audi Mot. (Dkt. No. 64); Bank Audi Br. (Dkt. No. 65)) Defendant Banque du Liban has moved to dismiss, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), 12(b)(2), 12(b)(6), and the forum non conveniens doctrine. (See Banque du Liban Mot. (Dkt. No. 67); Banque du Liban Br. (Dkt. No. 68)) In a February 23, 2023 Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), Judge Moses recommends granting both motions to dismiss. (R&R (Dkt. No. 94) at 28) Plaintiffs filed objections on April 21, 2023 (Pltf. Obj. (Dkt. No. 100)), and Defendants filed responses to Plaintiffs’ objections on May 12, 2023. (Banque du Liban Resp. (Dkt. No. 104); Bank Audi Resp. (Dkt. No. 106)) For the reasons stated below, Judge Moses’s R&R will be adopted in its entirety. BACKGROUND I. FACTS! Plaintiffs — a married couple — are United States citizens of Lebanese descent who reside in North Carolina. They are “successful real estate investors who own and manage income-producing properties,” and George Elghossain “owns and operates a real estate brokerage firm in North Carolina.” (R&R (Dkt. No. 94) at 4 (citing Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) {ff 97, 164-66, 187-89)) “Plaintiffs regularly travel to Lebanon for both personal and business reasons, and have kept bank accounts with Bank Audi, in Lebanon, since 1980.” Their accounts are kept at the Zahle, Lebanon branch of Bank Audi, where they are managed by Mona Doummar Charro, who is George Elghossain’s “one-time neighbor and longtime friend.” (Id. (citing Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) {ff 83-84, 224, 260)) “At unspecified times in the past, the Elghossains inherited some parcels of real estate in Lebanon, sold most of the parcels ‘in USD,’ and were able to have the proceeds deposited into their Bank Audi accounts and then transferred, by wire, to their bank accounts in the United States.” (Id. at 5 (quoting Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) §] 86-87)) “Over time, there ' Because the parties have not objected to Judge Moses’ factual account, this Court adopts it in full. See Silverman v. 3D Total Solutions, Inc., No. 18 Civ. 10231 (AT), 2020 WL 1285049, at *1 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2020) (“Because the parties have not objected to the R&R’s characterization of the background facts ..., the Court adopts the R&R’s ‘Background’ section and takes the facts characterized therein as true.”); Hafford v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., No. 16 Civ. 4425 (VEC) (SN), 2017 WL 4083580, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2017) (‘The parties do not object to the Magistrate Judge’s . . . recitation of the facts of this case, and the Court adopts them in full.”). were ‘at least five separate wire transfers in USD from Bank Audi in Lebanon to Plaintiffs’ bank accounts in the United States to the tune of $840,000.00.’” (Id. (quoting Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) § 88)) “Until the events that gave rise to this action, [P]laintiffs’ transfers from the U.S. to Lebanon were ‘infrequent and insignificant.’” (Id. (quoting Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) { 89)) Bank Audi is “‘a Lebanon-based commercial bank and financial services company headquartered in Beirut,’ offering a variety of financial products and services.” It “maintains correspondent bank accounts in New York at large US banks,’ including JPMorgan Chase.” (Id. (quoting Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) § 78, 93, 198)) Plaintiffs allege that Bank Audi also “‘maintains a branch in New [York] City operating as Interaudi Bank[,] formerly [known] as Bank Audi (U.S.A.),’” but Judge Moses notes that “this assertion is disputed.” (Id. (first alteration in original) (quoting Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) 4 177)) Banque du Liban is the central bank of Lebanon. (1d. at 9 (citing Am. Cmplt. (Dkt. No. 63) 4 3)) “Plaintiffs do not allege any direct communications or other interaction with [Banque du Liban]. Nor do they allege any specific communications or interaction with [Banque du Liban] and Bank Audi.” (Id.) Instead, Plaintiffs allege that Banque du Liban orchestrated a “Ponzi scheme” designed to delay the “imminent collapse of the Lebanese banking system,” which was carried out by means of a conspiracy among [Banque du Liban] and Lebanon’s commercial banks to “lure” Americans of Lebanese descent to deposit their dollars in LBP [Lebanese pound]-denominated accounts with promises of unsustainably high interest rates and “an alleged solid financial position.” 2 « 1 Paul G. Gardephe United States District Judge YO ‘ --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10354843. Public record. Not legal advice.