ADDITIONAL CASES SDJ Investments, LLC, et al. Intervenor-Plaintiffs, v. Collector’s Coffee Inc., et al., Defendants DECISION AND ORDER In May 2019, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) brought civil fraud charges against Mykalai Kontilai (“Kontilai”) and Collector’s Coffee Inc. (“CCI,” and collectively with Kontilai, “Defendants”). The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Gabriel Gorenstein to oversee general pretrial issues, including scheduling, discovery, nondispositive pretrial motions, and settlement. (See Dkt. No. 51.) On September 30, 2021, CCI filed a motion to dismiss Count Two of the Intervenor’s Amended Complaint (“Int. Compl.,” Dkt. No. 344). (See “Motion,” Dkt. No. 955; “CCI Mem.,” Dkt. No. 956.) Count Two is brought by CCI’s secured creditors1 (the “Holders”) who intervened in the matter to seek a declaratory judgment against the Jackie Robinson Foundation (“JRF”) stating that CCI, rather than JRF, owns two Major League Baseball contracts signed in 1945 and 1947 by Brooklyn Dodger Jackie Robinson (the “Contracts”). (See id.
55-71.) CCI argues that Count Two must be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 (“Rule 19″) because the Holders’ failed to join CCI, an indispensable party. (See CCI Mem. at 4.) On March 31, 2022, Magistrate Judge Gorenstein submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court deny CCI’s Motion. (See “R&R,” Dkt. No. 1000 at 8.) Magistrate Judge Gorenstein combined the R&R with an opinion and order granting JRF’s motion to amend its answer to assert crossclaims against CCI. (See R&R at 12.) On April 10, 2022, the Court received CCI’s objections to the R&R. (See “Objections,” Dkt. No. 1004-1.)2 The Holders opposed the Objections on April 12, 2022. (See “Holders Opp’n,” Dkt. No. 1007.) The SEC opposed the Objections on April 13, 2022. (See “SEC Opp’n,” Dkt. No. 1010.) JRF opposed the Objections on April 15, 2022. (See “JRF Opp’n,” Dkt. No. 1011.) I. BACKGROUND A. Factual and Procedural Background In May 2019, the SEC brought an action against CCI and Kontilai, the founder, President, and Chief Executive Officer of CCI, alleging that CCI and Kontilai defrauded investors. (See Dkt. No. 134.) The Holders later intervened in the action to bring claims against CCI, Kontilai, JRF, fifty unnamed individuals, and fifty unnamed corporations, asserting, among other things, that CCI, rather than JRF, owns the Contracts. (See Int. Compl.
