# Wah

> District Court, S.D. New York · January 15, 2026

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11379448

## Case

- **Full name:** Chan Ah Wah, et al. v. HSBC North America Holdings, Inc., et al.
- **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York
- **Decided:** January 15, 2026
- **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/11379448

## Opinion text

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11379448. Public record. Not legal advice.