Financial

Canadian Forex Price Fixing National Settlement

Overview

Class action lawsuits in Ontario and Quebec allege an unlawful conspiracy to fix prices in the foreign exchange market (the “FX Market”). Beginning at least as early as 2003 and continuing through 2013, it is alleged that the Defendants communicated directly with each other to coordinate their: (i) fixing of spot prices; (ii) controlling and manipulating FX benchmark rates; and (iii) exchanging key confidential customer information in an effort to trigger client stop loss orders and limit orders. The Defendants’ alleged conspiracy affected dozens of currency pairs, including the U.S. and Canadian dollar (USD/CAD) currency pair, which is one of the world’s highest volume trading currency pairs. Due to the importance of spot prices, it is alleged that the Defendants’ alleged conspiracy impacted all manner of FX instruments, including those trading both over-the counter and on exchanges.

FX Instruments include FX spot transactions, outright forwards, FX swaps, FX options, FX futures contracts, options on FX futures contracts, and other instruments traded in the FX Market.

Class

In Canada outside of Quebec, you are included in the Settlement Class if:

you are a person in Canada who, between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2013, entered into an FX Instrument either directly or indirectly through an intermediary, and/or purchased or otherwise participated in an investment or equity fund, mutual fund, hedge fund, pension fund or any other investment vehicle that entered into an FX Instrument and you did not opt-out of the lawsuit on or before December 5, 2016.

In Quebec, you are included in the Settlement Class if:

you are a person in Quebec who, between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2013, entered into an FX Instrument[1] either directly or indirectly through an intermediary, and/or purchased or otherwise participated in an investment or equity fund, mutual fund, hedge fund, pension fund or any other investment vehicle that entered into an FX Instrument and you did not opt-out of the lawsuit on or before December 5, 2016.

“FX Instruments” includes FX spot transactions, outright forwards, FX swaps, FX options, FX futures contracts, options on FX futures contracts, and other instruments traded in the FX Market. Excluded from the class are the Defendants, their parent companies, subsidiaries, and affiliates; provided, however, that Investment Vehicles are not excluded from the class.

Defendants​

• UBS AG, UBS Securities LLC and UBS Bank (Canada)
• BNP Paribas ​Group
• Bank of America Corporation
• The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
• JPMorgan Chase & Co., J.P. Morgan Bank Canada
• Citigroup Inc., Citibank, N.A., Citibank Canada, and ​Citigroup Global Markets Canada
• Barclays Bank PLC, Barclays Capital Inc., and Barclays Capital Canada Inc.
• HSBC Holdings PLC
• Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC,
• Standard Chartered PLC
• The Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd.
• Société Générale S.A., Société Générale (Canada)​

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​

Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Settlement

1:13-md-2476 US District Court Southern District of New York

Overview​​

Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants (see below) engaged in anticompetitive acts that affected the price of Credit Default Swaps in violation of the Sherman Act. The lawsuit also alleges that Defendants were unjustly enriched under common law by their anticompetitive acts.

Definition of a CDS Transaction

“CDS” means any and all types of credit default swap(s) and CDS-based products, including, without limitation, single-name CDS, CDS on corporate, sovereign and municipal reference entities, tranche CDS, basket CDS, index CDS, and CDS futures. A “CDS Transaction” means (i) any purchase, sale, trade, assignment, novation, unwind, termination, or other exercise of rights or options with respect to any CDS, whether executed over-the-counter or via inter-dealer brokers, a centralized clearinghouse, a central limit order book, an exchange, a swap execution facility, or any other platform or trading facility; or (ii) any decision to withhold a bid or offer on, or to decline to purchase, sell, trade, assign, novate, unwind, terminate or otherwise exercise any rights or options with respect to any CDS.​

Class

All persons or entities (“Persons”) who, during the period of January 1, 2008 through September 25, 2015, purchased CDS from or sold CDS to the Dealer Defendants, their respective affiliates, or any purported co-conspirator, in any Covered Transaction. The settlement agreements define a Covered Transaction as follows: “A purchase or sale of CDS shall be deemed to be a “Covered Transaction” in each of the following circumstances: (i) if the purchase or sale was by or on behalf of a Person either domiciled or located (e.g., had a principal place of business) in the United States or its territories at the time of such purchase or sale; (ii) if the Person was domiciled and located outside the United States and its territories at the time of any such purchase or sale, where such purchase or sale was in United States commerce; or (iii) where such purchase or sale otherwise falls within the scope of the U.S. antitrust laws.” Examples of a “Covered Transaction” include: (i) you are domiciled or located in the United States or its territories and you made a CDS Transaction with a Dealer Defendant or one of its affiliates; (ii) you are domiciled and located outside the United States or its territories and you made a CDS Transaction with a Dealer Defendant or one of its affiliates located in the United States or its territories; or (iii) you are domiciled and located outside the United States or its territories and you made a CDS Transaction with a Dealer Defendant or one of its affiliates that was executed through a desk located in the United States or its territories.

Defendants

• Bank of America Corporation & Bank of America, N.A.
• Barclays Bank PLC
• BNP Paribas
• Citigroup Inc., Citibank, N.A. & Citigroup Global Markets Inc.
• Credit Suisse AG
• Deutsche Bank AG
• Goldman, Sachs & Co.
• HSBC Bank PLC & HSBC Bank USA, N.A.
• International Swaps and Derivatives Association
• JPMorgan Chase & Co. & J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
• Markit Group Holdings Ltd. & Markit Group Ltd.
• Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
• Royal Bank of Scotland PLC
• UBS AG & UBS Securities LLC

Total Settlements: $1,864,650,000

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​ ​

Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

Euribor Products Settlement

1:13-cv-02811 US District Court, Southern District of New York

Overview

Plaintiffs allege that Defendants manipulated Euribor and the prices of Euribor Products. For example, panel banks that made daily Euribor submissions to Thomson Reuters, such as Barclays, HSBC and Deutsche Bank, allegedly falsely reported their borrowing costs, in order to financially benefit their Euribor Products positions. Defendants also requested that other Defendants make false Euribor submissions on their behalf, to benefit their Euribor Products positions. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants conspired to fix prices of Euribor Products in the over-the-counter market to financially benefit their own Euribor Products positions. In addition to coordinating Euribor submissions and agreeing on where to price Euribor Products, in order to allegedly manipulate Euribor and Euribor Products during the Class Period, Defendants allegedly engaged in “pushing cash,” transmitted false bids and offers, used derivative traders as submitters, and rigged bids and offers for Euribor Products.

Class

All Persons that purchased, sold, held, traded, or otherwise had any interest in any Euribor Products between June 1, 2005 and March 31, 2011, (“Class Period”), who were either domiciled in the United States or its territories or, if domiciled outside the United States or its territories, transacted Euribor Products in the United States or its territories during the Class Period, including, but not limited to, all Persons who traded CME Euro currency futures contracts, all Persons who transacted in NYSE LIFFE Euribor futures and options from a location within the United States, and all Persons who traded any other Euribor Product from a location within the United States.

Defendants

• Barclays plc
• Barclays Bank plc
• Barclays Capital Inc. (collectively, “Barclays”)
• HSBC Holdings plc​
• HSBC Bank plc (collectively, “HSBC”)
• Deutsche Bank AG
• DB Group Services (UK) Ltd. (collectively, “Deutsche Bank”)

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​

Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

EuroYen Settlement

1:12-cv-3419 US District Court, Southern District of New York & Related Cases

Overview

Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, between January 1, 2006 and June 30, 2011, manipulated or helped manipulate Yen-LIBOR, EuroYen TIBOR, and the prices of EuroYen-Based Derivatives. Panel banks that made the daily Yen-LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR submissions to the British Bankers’ Association and Japanese Bankers Association (collectively, “Contributor Bank Defendants”), such as Citi and HSBC, allegedly falsely reported their cost of borrowing in order to financially benefit their Euroyen-Based Derivatives positions. Contributor Bank Defendants also requested that other Contributor Bank Defendants make false Yen-LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR submissions on their behalf to benefit their Euroyen-Based Derivatives positions.

Plaintiffs further allege that inter-dealer brokers, intermediaries between buyers and sellers in the money markets and derivatives markets (the “Broker Defendants”), such as RP Martin, had knowledge of and assisted the Contributor Bank Defendants’ alleged manipulations of Euroyen-Based Derivatives, in violation of the Commodity Exchange Act. For example, Contributor Bank Defendants used the Broker Defendants to manipulate Yen-LIBOR, Euroyen TIBOR, and the prices of Euroyen-Based Derivatives by disseminating false “Suggested LIBORs,” publishing false market rates on broker screens, and publishing false bids and offers into the market.

EuroYen Based Derivatives Are

EuroYen TIBOR futures contract on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”), Tokyo Financial Exchange (“TFX”), Singapore Exchange (“SGX”), or London International Financial Futures & Options Exchange (“LIFFE”) entered into by a US person, or by a person from or through a location within the US; a Japanese Yen currency futures contract on the CME; a Yen
​LIBOR-and/or EuroYen TIBOR-based interest rate swap entered into by a US person, or by a person from or through a location within the US; an option on a Yen LIBOR-and/or EuroYen TIBOR-based interest rate swap (“swaption”) entered into by a US person, or by a person from or through a location within the US; and a Yen LIBOR-and/or EuroYen TIBOR-based forward rate agreement entered into by a US person, or by a person from or through a location with the US.

Class

All Persons that purchased, sold, held, traded, or otherwise had any interest in any Euroyen-Based Derivatives during the period of January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011 (“Class Period”). Excluded from the Class are Defendants and their parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, or agents; the Released Parties (as defined in the Agreements); and any Class Member who files a timely and valid request for exclusion.

Defendants

Contributor Bank Defendants

• Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd.
• Bank of Yokohama, Ltd.
• Barclays Bank PLC
• Citibank Japan Ltd.
• Citibank, NA
• Citigroup Global Markets Japan, Inc.
• Citigroup Inc.
• Deutsche Bank AG
• HSBC Bank PLC
• HSBC Holdings PLC
• ICAP Europe Ltd.
• JP Morgan Chase & Co.
• JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Association
• JP Morgan Securities Plc.
• Lloyds Banking Group PLC
• Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd.​
• Mitsubishi UFJ Trust & Banking Corporation
• Mizuho Corporate Bank, Ltd.
• Norinchukin Bank
• Rabobank
• RBS Securities Japan Ltd.
• Royal Bank of Scotland Group
• Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC
• RP Martin Holdings Ltd.
• Shinkin Central Bank
• Shoko Chukin Bank, Ltd.
• Societe Generale SA
• Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation
• Sumitomo Trust & Banking Co., Ltd.
• Tullett Prebon PLC
• UBS AG
• UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd.

​

​Broker Defendants

• Barclays Plc.
• Bank of America Corporation
• Bank of America, NA
• Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd.
• Bank of Yokohama, Ltd.
• Barclays Bank Plc.
• Barclays Capital Inc.
• Citibank Japan, Ltd.
• Citibank, NA
• Citigroup Global Markets Japan, Inc.
• Citigroup, Inc.
• DB Group Services UK Ltd.
• Deutsche Bank AG
• HSBC Bank Plc.
• HSBC Holdings Plc.
• ICAP Europe Ltd.
• ICAP Plc.
• JP Morgan Chase & Co.
• JP Morgan Securities Plc.
• JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Assoc.
• Lloyds Bank Plc.
• Lloyds Banking Group Plc.
• Martin Brokers (UK), Ltd.
• Merrill Lynch International
• Mitsubishi UFJ Trust & Banking Corp.
• Mizuho Bank, Ltd.
• Mizuho Corporate Bank, Ltd.
• Mizuho Trust & Banking Co., Ltd.
• Norinchukin Bank
• Rabobank
• RBS Securities Inc.
• RBS Securities Japan Ltd.
• Resona Bank, Ltd.
• Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc.
• Royal Bank of Scotland Plc.
• RP Martin Holdings, Ltd.
• Shinkin Central Bank
• Shoko Chukin Bank, Ltd.
• Societe Generale SA
• Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp.
• Sumitomo Trust & Banking Co., Ltd.
• Tullett Prebon Plc.
• UBS AG
• UBS Securities Japan Co. Ltd.

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​

​​​​​Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Settlement

1:13-cv-07789 US District Court, Southern District of New York

Overview​

Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants (see below) conspired to fix prices in the foreign exchange (“FX”) market in violation of the Sherman Act and the Commodity Exchange Act. Nine defendants have so far agreed to pay over $2 billion in settlements. The plaintiffs claim that the bank employees colluded to trade in ways that would create favorable fixed rates and manipulate the global foreign exchange market.

The Direct Settlement Class

All Persons who, between January 1, 2003 and December 15, 2015, entered into an FX Instrument directly with a Defendant, a direct or indirect parent, subsidiary, or division of a Defendant, a Released Party, or co-conspirator where such Persons were either domiciled in the United States or its territories or, if domiciled outside the United States or its territories, transacted FX Instruments in the United States or its territories. Specifically excluded from the Direct Settlement Class are Defendants; Released Parties; coconspirators; the officers, directors, or employees of any Defendant, Released Party, or coconspirator; any entity in which any Defendant, Released Party, or co-conspirator has a controlling interest; any affiliate, legal representative, heir, or assign of any Defendant, Released Party, or co-conspirator and any person acting on their behalf; provided, however, that Investment Vehicles shall not be excluded from the definition of the Direct Settlement Class. Also excluded from the Direct Settlement Class are any judicial officer presiding over this action and the members of his/her immediate family and judicial staff, and any juror assigned to this Action.

The Exchange-Only Settlement Class

All Persons who, between January 1, 2003 and December 15, 2015, entered into FX Exchange-Traded Instruments where such Persons were either domiciled in the United States or its territories or, if domiciled outside the United States or its territories, entered into FX Exchange-Traded Instruments on a U.S. exchange. Specifically excluded from the Exchange-Only Settlement Class are Defendants; Released Parties; coconspirators; the officers, directors, or employees of any Defendant, Released Party, or coconspirator; any entity in which any Defendant, Released Party, or co-conspirator has a controlling interest; any affiliate, legal representative, heir, or assign of any Defendant, Released Party, or co-conspirator and any person acting on their behalf; provided, however, that Investment Vehicles shall not be excluded from the definition of the Exchange-Only Settlement Class. Also excluded from the Exchange-Only Settlement Class are: (i) any judicial officer presiding over this action and any member of his/her immediate family and judicial staff, and any juror assigned to this Action; and (ii) any Person who, between January 1, 2003 and the date of the Preliminary Approval Order, entered into an FX Instrument directly with a Defendant, a direct or indirect parent, subsidiary, or division of a Defendant, a Released Party, or coconspirator, where such Person was either domiciled in the United States or its territories or, if domiciled outside the United States or its territories, transacted FX Instruments in the United States or its territories.

Defendants

• Bank of America
• Goldman Sachs
• Barclays
• HSBC
• BNP Paribas
• JP Morgan
• Citigroup
• Morgan Stanley
• Credit Suisse
• Royal Bank of Scotland
• Deutsche Bank
• UBS
• Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi
• RBC
• Societe Generale
• Standard Chartered

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​

Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

Gold Futures and Options Trading Antitrust Settlement

1:14-md-02548 US District Court, Southern District of New York

Overview

Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants colluded to manipulate “London Gold Market Fix,” a global benchmark reference rate used in the price often agreed to be used in advance by buyers and sellers of gold. Throughout the Class Period (as defined below), The Bank of Nova Scotia,
Barclays, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, and Société Générale (the “Fixing Bank Defendants”) met
privately twice each London business day for what is aptly known as the London Gold Market
Fixing (hereafter the “London Gold Fixing” or “Fixing”). The Fixing produces a benchmark
rate for gold, a price often agreed to be used in advance by buyers and sellers of gold. Plaintiffs assert that defendants colluded to manipulate the London Gold Market Fix rate to ensure the rate moved in the direction that they wished to ensure maximum profitability, rather than a fair auction as intended.

Class

All persons or entities who during the period from January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2013, either (A) sold any physical gold or financial or derivative instrument in which gold is the underlying reference asset, including, but not limited to, those who sold (i) gold bullion, gold bullion coins, gold bars, gold ingots or any form of physical gold, (ii) gold futures contracts in transactions conducted in whole or in part on COMEX or any other exchange operated in the United States, (iii) shares in gold exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), (iv) gold call options in transactions Case 1:14-md-02548-VEC Document 187 Filed 12/09/16 Page 3 of 84conducted over-the-counter or in whole or in part on COMEX or any other exchange operated in the United States; (v) gold spot, gold forwards or gold swaps over-the-counter; or (B) bought gold put options in transactions conducted over-the- counter or in whole or in part on COMEX or on any other exchange operated in the United States.

Defendants (the “Fixing Bank Defendants”)

• Bank of Nova Scotia
• Barclays
• Deutsche Bank
• HSBC
• Société Générale

Settling Defendants

• Deutsche Bank

Partial Settlements: $60,000,000

Filing Deadline: Not yet established

​​​​​Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

ISDA Derivatives Antitrust Settlement

1:14-cv-07126 US District Court, Southern District of New York

Overview

Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants colluded to manipulate “ISDAfix,” a global benchmark reference rate used in the interest rate derivatives market. Defendants are 14 banks that dominate the market for interest rate derivatives, as well as ICAP, an interdealer broker that served as the administrator of the ISDAfix-setting process during the Class Period. ISDAfix rates are published daily and were designed to represent the current market rate for the fixed leg of a standard fixed-for-floating interest rate swap. ISDAfix rates are published for various currencies and maturities.

An ISDAfix Instrument Is:

Any and all interest rate derivatives, including but not limited to swaps, swap spreads, swap futures, and swaptions, denominated in USD or related to USD interest rates, and (ii) any financial instrument, product, or transaction related in any way to any ISDAfix Benchmark Rates, including but not limited to instruments, products, or transactions that reference ISDAfix Benchmark Rates and instruments, products, or transactions that are relevant to determining or calculating ISDAfix Benchmark Rates.

ISDAfix Benchmark Rates Are:

Any and all tenors of USD ISDAfix, including USD ISDAfix rates and USD ISDAfix spreads, and “reference rates” distributed as part of the USD ISDAfix submission process.

Class

All persons and entities who, from January 1, 2006 to January 31, 2014, (the “Class Period”), entered into, received or made payments on, terminated, transacted in, or held an ISDAfix Instrument during the Settlement Class Period. Excluded from this Class are the Defendants and their employees, affiliates, parents and subsidiaries.

Defendants

• Bank of America Corporation
• Barclays Bank
• BNP Paribas
• Citigroup
• Credit Suisse, New York Branch
• Deutsche Bank AG
• Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
• HSBC Bank PLC
• ICAP Capital Markets LLC
• JPMorgan Chase & Company
• Morgan Stanley & Company, LLC
• Nomura Securities International, Inc.
• Royal Bank of Scotland PLC
• UBS AG
• Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​

Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

LIBOR-Based Financial Instruments Settlement

1:11-md-02262 US District Court, Southern District of New York

Overview

Plaintiffs allege that prominent financial institutions manipulated the London InterBank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, which is the primary benchmark for determining short term interest rates for financial instruments worldwide. The Defendant banks, members of the U.S. Dollar LIBOR panel during the Class Period (August 2007 through May 2010), were motivated to suppress LIBOR for two reasons. First, since the interest rate a bank pays on its debt is perceived as a sign of the bank’s risk, the Defendants understated their borrowing costs (suppressing LIBOR) to appear more financially secure. Second, artificially suppressing LIBOR allowed Defendants to pay lower interest rates on LIBOR-based financial instruments that Defendants sold to investors, including the Baltimore Plaintiffs, during the Class Period.

Class

For OTC Claimants: All persons or entities, other than Defendants and their employees, affiliates, parents, and subsidiaries, that purchased in the United States, directly from a Defendant, a U.S. Dollar LIBOR-Based Instrument and that owned the U.S. Dollar LIBOR-Based Instrument any time during the period August 2007 through May 2010.

Defendants

• Credit Suisse Group AG
• Credit Suisse International
• Credit Suisse (USA) Inc.
• Bank of America Corporation
• Bank of America, N.A.
• JPMorgan Chase & Co.
• JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA
• HSBC Holdings PLC
• HSBC Bank PLC
• Barclays Bank plc
• Lloyds Banking Group PLC
• WestLB AG
• Westdeutsche Immobilienbank AG
• UBS AG
• The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC
• Citizens Bank of Massachusetts a/k/a RBS Citizens Bank N.A.Deutsche Bank AG
• Citibank NA; Citigroup Inc.
• Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen Boerenleenbank B.A.
• The Norinchukin Bank
• The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd
• HBOS PLC
• Société Générale S.A.
• Royal Bank of Canada
• And any other Person or Persons who are named as defendants in the OTC Action

Filing Deadline: Contact SRG​

Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.

London Silver Fixing Antitrust Settlement

1:14-md-02573 US District Court, Southern District of New York

Overview

Until very recently, the price of silver was set by a combination of three of the world’s largest multinational banks—the members of The London Silver Market Fixing, Ltd. The three banks are Deutsche Bank AG (“Deutsche”), HSBC U.S.A. Bank, N.A. (“HSBC”), and The Bank of Nova Scotia-ScotiaMocatta (“Scotiabank”) (collectively the “Fixing Members”). The name of the process was the “Silver Fix.” The Silver Fix determined the benchmark price of silver worldwide from 1897 until August 14, 2014. The Fixing Members literally fixed the price of silver once per day, every business day, through a secure conference call, at noon, London time. There were no outside observers or regulatory body, and Plaintiffs are aware of no recordings or transcripts ever released. Plaintiffs assert that through this clandestine device, Defendants dictated the price of physical silver and thereby the prices of silver financial instruments such as silver futures and options, the prices of which are directly and proximately caused by, and directly linked to, the price of physical silver, both physical and futures — around the noon Silver Fix, that created a distinct tradable advantage of up to 40 basis points per day for the Fixing Members and other insiders. This advantage persisted “in bull markets, bear markets, and everything in between” defying price trends in the broader market throughout the Class Period.

​
Class

All persons or entities that transacted in U.S.-Related Transactions in or on any over the-counter market (“OTC”) or exchange in physical silver or in a derivative instrument in which silver is the underlying reference asset (collectively, “Silver Instruments”), at any time from January 1, 1999 through September 6th of 2016. “U.S.-Related Transaction” means any transaction in a Silver Instrument (a) by any person or entity domiciled in the U.S. or its territories, or (b) by any person or entity domiciled outside the U.S. or its territories but conducted, in whole or in part, in the U.S. or its territories.

Defendants

• Deutsche Bank AG
• Deutsche Bank Americas Holding Corporation
• DB U.S. Financial Markets Holding Corporation
• Deutsche Bank
• Securities, Inc.
• Deutsche Bank Trust Corporation
• Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas​
• Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch
• Bank of Nova Scotia
• HSBC Holdings PLC
• HSBC Bank PLC
• HSBC Bank U.S.A. N.A.
• London Silver Market Fixing LTD
• Scotia Capital (USA) Inc.
• Scotia Holdings (USA) Inc.
• Scotia Bank Inc.

Filing Deadline: To Be Determined

​​​​​Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims.​ We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.