Superb Motors Inc. v. Deo, 2:23-cv-06188

Superb Motors Inc., Team Auto Sales LLC, and Robert Anthony Urrutia ("Superb Plaintiffs") sought reconsideration of two recent court orders: one holding them in contempt for failing to provide odometer readings, and another denying their request to modify a preliminary injunction regarding the sale of certain vehicles.
The underlying litigation involves ownership, storage, and sale of vehicles subject to court-ordered injunction, with numerous parties including the "Deo Defendants" and several automotive entities.
Procedurally, the court had previously denied prior motions by Superb Plaintiffs seeking similar relief, emphasizing the strict standards for reconsideration and need for concrete, timely information.
At issue were thirteen vehicles remaining from an original group of thirty, with some vehicles sold or repossessed by third parties since prior court orders.
Superb Plaintiffs argued new facts and evidence supported reconsideration, specifically that Team Auto Sales LLC owns the remaining vehicles and that prior vehicle repossessions or sales were outside their control.
The Court ultimately denied reconsideration but granted a limited stay pending appeal to the Second Circuit, and clarified its rationale regarding the Surrender Agreement with Nissan.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Reconsideration of Contempt Order (odometer readings)	Facts re: repossession excused noncompliance for 1 vehicle; counsel's oversight for 2 trucks shouldn't warrant contempt.	Plaintiffs did not raise excuses during original contempt proceeding; opposition focuses on vehicle sales/repossessions.	Motion denied; prior facts not timely presented; contempt stands.
Modification of Preliminary Injunction (vehicle sales)	Remaining vehicles are now owned by Team Auto Sales, a party, so harm warrants sale; new facts justify reconsideration.	New facts should have been raised earlier; continued opposition to further court relief.	Motion denied; no overlooked controlling fact or law.
Court finding of encumbrance via Surrender Agreement	Agreement did not encumber vehicles due to a carve-out clause.	Nissan reserved rights, creating an encumbrance after injunction.	Court did not err—Agreement gave Nissan interests in vehicles.
Stay pending appeal	Requested stay pending Second Circuit decision on the Orders.	Not opposed (explicit opposition not shown).	Stay granted for five days after appellate decision.

Shrader v. CSX Transp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 1995) (explains the strict standard for granting reconsideration in the Second Circuit)
Analytical Surveys, Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P., 684 F.3d 36 (2d Cir. 2012) (motions for reconsideration are not vehicles to relitigate issues or raise new arguments)
Kolel Beth Yechiel Mechil of Tartikov, Inc. v. YLL Irrevocable Trust, 729 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2013) (lists bases for reconsideration: intervening law, new evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice)
NEM Re Receivables, LLC v. Fortress Re, Inc., 187 F. Supp. 3d 390 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) (Local Rule 6.3 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 establish same reconsideration standard)