Vitro lawyers have filed a request for an order of dismissal in the ongoing boycott civil lawsuit between O.E.M. Glass Network Inc. and Brooklyn Wholesale Glass Inc. (known together as OEMGN). The stipulation for dismissal would only apply to the Vitro defendants in the suit.
“Vitro, S.A.B. de C.V., Vitro Automotive Glass LLC, and Vitro Automotriz, S.A. de C.V. (collectively, the Vitro Defendants), by their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to dismissal with prejudice of OEMGN’s claims only as against the Vitro defendants, and with each side to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs,” a portion of the stipulation for dismissal reads.
O.E.M. Glass Network Inc. and Brooklyn Wholesale Glass Inc. (known together as OEMGN) have alleged that a group of suppliers including Mygrant, Interstate Glass of Amityville NY LLC (Interstate Glass), Metro Glass Distributing Inc. (Metro Glass), Xinyi Auto Glass North America Corp. (Xinyi), Vitro S.A.B. de C.V., Vitro Automotive Glass LLC, Vitro Automotoriz (Vitro), Fuyao Glass America Inc. (Fuyao), Auto Temp Inc. and Sika Corp (Sika) were behind an industry boycott.
In February 2019 OEMGN filed suit against two auto glass distributors and several manufacturers alleging they conspired against the N.Y. companies and boycotted them in an attempt to eliminate it from the market. In April 2019 the courts extended time for the defense to file a response to claims made against them by OEMGN. Then in May 2019 there was a combined motion to dismiss filed by the defendants, to which OEMGN expressed an opposing view. An amended complaint was filed in October 2019 by OEMGN, however several of the original allegations remained in the amended version. In January 2020, Vitro Automotriz filed a document to dismiss OEMGN’s amended complaint against it. In February 2020, U.S. District Judge Nicholas G. Garufis dismissed and allowed some parts of the claims against urethane manufacturer, Sika Corporation. In April 2020, Mygrant filed a response to the amended complaint and denied all of the allegations listed against the company. In August 2020, the Federal Court Judge issued new stipulations and a “proposed” protection order in the suit. The proposed protection order is designed to safeguard confidential business and trade secret information.