DocketNumber: 12-1732
Citation Numbers: 511 F. App'x 57
Judges: Amalya, Carney, Dennis, Jacobs, Kearse, Susan
Filed Date: 2/6/2013
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 8/6/2023
12-1732 Valenti v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance Co. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United 3 States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, 4 on the 6th day of February, two thousand thirteen. 5 6 PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, 7 Chief Judge, 8 AMALYA L. KEARSE, 9 SUSAN L. CARNEY, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 13 ROSE VALENTI, ROXANNE COMMISSO, HAYA 14 ZIZERSKY, THERESA KUROWSKI, MARLENE 15 RAMSAMOOJ, MICHELLE MICHAELS, LORETA 16 JARLEGO, TITI SOYEIJU, BELLA ZAHAVI, CAROL 17 KURA, ROBERT VALENTI, VALENTI, LIMITED, 18 SEEMA AZIM, ANNETTE PICO, KRYSTYNA 19 JASINSKI, STEPHEN VALENTI, DONALD VALENTI, 20 ANNA STARKMAN, 21 Plaintiffs-Appellants, 22 23 -v.- 12-1732 24 25 PENN MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, VICTOR 26 P. MAURO, 27 Defendants-Appellees, 28 1 1 PENN PENSION CENTER, INC., ANDREW SIEGEL, 2 Defendants. 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 4 5 FOR APPELLANTS: JILL ROSELL (Alice H. Oshins, on 6 the brief), Jill Rosell, PLLC, 7 New York, New York. 8 9 FOR APPELLEES: STEVEN E. MELLEN (Jessica E. 10 Levine, on the brief), Winget, 11 Spadafora & Schwartzberg, LLP, 12 New York, New York. 13 14 Appeal from a judgment of the United States District 15 Court for the Southern District of New York (Koeltl, J.). 16 17 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED 18 AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be 19 AFFIRMED. 20 21 Rose Valenti, her husband, and other associated 22 individuals who participated in an employee benefit plan, 23 appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court 24 for the Southern District of New York (Koeltl, J.), granting 25 summary judgment in favor of Penn Mutual Life Insurance 26 Company and Victor P. Mauro. We assume the parties’ 27 familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural 28 history, and the issues presented for review. 29 30 On appeal, Valenti raises a host of discovery issues 31 that were not properly raised below (e.g., Penn Mutual’s 32 failure to produce trade blotters) and that have not been 33 preserved for appeal to this Court. We decline to exercise 34 our discretion to review these unpreserved discovery issues. 35 See Caidor v. Onondaga Cnty.,517 F.3d 601
, 603 (2d Cir. 36 2008). 37 38 Valenti’s remaining arguments amount to pure 39 speculation that Penn Mutual embezzled funds from the 40 employee benefit plan. In order to defeat summary judgment, 41 a plaintiff “must do more than simply show that there is 42 some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.” 43 Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp.,475 U.S. 44
574, 586 (1986); see also McPherson v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of 45 Educ.,457 F.3d 211
, 215 n.4 (2d Cir. 2006) (“[S]peculation 46 alone is insufficient to defeat a motion for summary 47 judgment.”). Valenti points to no admissible evidence to 2 1 support her claim of embezzlement. The financial statements 2 produced by Penn Mutual reflect a detailed and proper 3 accounting. 4 5 For the foregoing reasons, and finding no merit in 6 Valenti’s other arguments, we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of 7 the district court. 8 9 FOR THE COURT: 10 CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLFE, CLERK 11 3