Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
February 24, 2015, Decided; February 24, 2015, Filed
14 Civ. 927 (KPF)
OPINION AND ORDER
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge:
On February 13, 2014, Plaintiff Trevor Murray filed this action against Defendants UBS Securities, LLC ("UBS Securities"), and UBS AG ("UBS") (collectively, "Defendants") under 18 U.S.C. § 1514A(a), the anti-retaliation provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745 ("Sarbanes-Oxley"), and 12 U.S.C. § 5567(a), the anti-retaliation provision of Title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 111-203, 123 Stat. 1376 ("Dodd-Frank"), commonly known as the Consumer Financial Protection Act (the "CFPA"). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated the anti-retaliation provisions of both statutes in terminating his employment after Plaintiff made certain protected statements. Defendants have moved to dismiss both claims for impermissible claim-splitting, based upon a prior action filed in [*2] this Court alleging retaliation under Dodd-Frank; in the alternative, to dismiss the CFPA claims for failure to state a claim; and to stay any remaining portion of the action due to pending arbitration on the Dodd-Frank claim. For the reasons set forth in this Opinion, Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted, but only with regard to the CFPA claim, and their request to stay the remaining Sarbanes-Oxley claim is denied.
A. Factual Background
1. Plaintiff's Employment with UBS Securities
Plaintiff was first employed by UBS Securities, a broker-dealer registered with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), from approximately May 2007 to September 2009, at which time Plaintiff was laid off. (Am. Compl. ¶ 10).2 Thereafter, in early 2011, UBS Securities solicited Plaintiff to return to work for the company. (Id. at ¶ 13). In [*3] or around May 2011, Plaintiff rejoined UBS Securities as a Senior Commercial Mortgage-Backed Security ("CMBS") Strategist and Executive Director. (Id. at ¶ 14). In that position, Plaintiff performed research and created reports "that were distributed to Defendants' current and potential clients about CMBS products, services and transactions, including, without limitation, CMBS products, services and transactions regulated by the [SEC] and/or the [Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the 'CFPB')], and CMBS products in which UBS Securities held trading positions." (Id. at ¶ 2).
2. Plaintiff's Agreements to Arbitrate with Defendants
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22024 *; 39 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1522
TREVOR MURRAY, Plaintiff, v. UBS SECURITIES, LLC and UBS AG, Defendants.
Subsequent History: Summary judgment denied by Murray v. Ubs Secs, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62978 (S.D.N.Y., Mar. 31, 2017)
Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by, in part, Motion denied by, in part, Judgment entered by Murray v. UBS Sec., LLC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 236565 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 16, 2020)
Prior History: Murray v. UBS Secs., LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71945 (S.D.N.Y., May 21, 2013)
arbitration, regulation, consumer, products, termination, duplicative, anti-retaliation, trading, amended complaint, transactions, parties, courts, motion to dismiss, preclusive effect, nonarbitrable, proceedings, retaliation, preclusion, provisions, accrue, wait