Opinion

Wah

Court
District Court, S.D. New York
Filed
Jan 15, 2026
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 41.5%

The opinion

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

--------------------------------------------------------------X

:

CHAN AH WAH, et al., :

:

Plaintiffs, : 15 Civ. 8974 (LGS)

: 17 Civ. 6863 (LGS)

-against- :

: ORDER

HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS, INC., :

et al., :

:

Defendants. :

------------------------------------------------------------- X

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge:

WHEREAS, pro se Plaintiff Lim Cheok Kee Willy sent to the Court a letter regarding

Plaintiff’s daughter. The envelope, addressed to the Court’s Pro Se Intake office, indicated that

the letter should be docketed in Chan Ah Wah v. HSBC North America Holdings, Inc., No. 15

Civ. 8974. The letter was also docketed in the related case Ah Wah Chan v. HSBC North

America Holdings Inc., No. 17 Civ. 6863.

WHEREAS, although the Court is sympathetic to pro se Plaintiff, the relief requested in

the letter cannot be granted in these cases. These cases, which have been closed since 2019,

concerned allegations that Defendant banks engaged in a conspiracy to manipulate benchmark

rates in the foreign exchange market. In order to seek the requested relief, Plaintiff must file a

new case.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff is also advised that, based on the allegations in Plaintiff’s letter,

state court is likely the proper venue for any new case that Plaintiff files. This Court is a federal

court, and federal courts have “limited jurisdiction” to hear only specific types of disputes. See

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). State courts, on the other

hand, typically possess broader authority to hear disputes. Plaintiff’s letter, even liberally

construed, does not appear to raise any issues that are within a federal court’s power to decide.

However, the letter may raise issues that a state court would potentially possess the power to

decide. It is hereby

ORDERED that Plaintiffs letter be stricken from the dockets of case Nos. 15 Civ. 8974

and 17 Civ. 6863, because the letter is unrelated to the issues in these cases.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to pro se Plaintiff

Willy and to strike Dkt. 329 in case No. 15 Civ. 8974 and Dkt. 79 in case No. 17 Civ. 6863.

Dated: January 15, 2026

New York, New York

Lorna G. Scio

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.