Winter v. Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. — Entry #132: REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 127 MOTION for Settlement Final Approval
Case: Winter v. Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. nysd · 1:22-cv-03088
filed April 14, 2022
What this document is
Docket entry #132 · filed April 04, 2025
REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 127 MOTION for Settlement Final Approval. . Document filed by Allegheny County Employees Retirement System. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Declaration of Sarah Evans, # 2 Proposed Order Final Judgment).(Stern, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/04/2025)
Who is involved
- Allegheny County Employees Retirement System
- B. Riley Securities, Inc.
- Compass Point Research & Trading, LLC
- Cowen and Company, LLC
- D.A. Davidson & Co.
- Edward J. Young
- Greg R. Stuart
- Gregory A. Beard
- Gulzar Ahmed
- Mark Winter
- Northland Securities, Inc.
- Ricardo R. A Larroude
- Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc.
- Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, LLC
- William B. Spence
Why we have it
We follow this case because it names a company we track, although that company is not a party:
- TeraWulf: its name “TeraWulf Inc.” appears in a filing in this case.
…solutions to notable global blockchain players like Terawulf Inc. and TrueNorth Data Solutions. The Company will…
A free copy from the RECAP archive of federal court filings (mirrored at the Internet Archive), retrieved September 28, 2026. Federal court filings are public records.
Document text
10 page(s), 20,326 characters, converted from the PDF's text layer · plain text.
Full text
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 1 of 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
MARK WINTER, Individually and on Behalf of All Case No. 1:22-cv-03088-RA
Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC.,
GREGORY A. BEARD, RICARDO R. A.
LARROUDÉ, WILLIAM B. SPENCE, B. RILEY
SECURITIES, INC., COWEN AND COMPANY,
LLC, TUDOR, PICKERING, HOLT & CO.
SECURITIES, LLC, D.A. DAVIDSON & CO.,
COMPASS POINT RESEARCH & TRADING,
LLC, and NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.,
Defendants.
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT
WHEREAS:
A. As of November 6, 2024, Class Representative Allegheny County Employees
Retirement System (“Plaintiff”), on behalf of itself and all other members of the Settlement Class
(defined below), on the one hand, and Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. (“Stronghold”), Gregory A.
Beard, William B. Spence (together with Stronghold, the “Stronghold Defendants”), B. Riley
Securities, Inc., Cowen and Company, LLC, Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, LLC, D.A.
Davidson & Co., Compass Point Research & Trading, LLC, and Northland Securities, Inc.
(collectively, the “Underwriter Defendants”), and Ricardo R. A. Larroudé, (together with the
Underwriter and Stronghold Defendants, the “Settling Defendants”) on the other, entered into a
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 2 of 10
Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated November 6, 2024 (the “Stipulation”) in the
above-titled litigation (the “Action”);
B. Pursuant to the Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement,
Approving Form and Manner of Notice, and Setting Date for Hearing on Final Approval of
Settlement, entered December 16, 2024 (the “Preliminary Approval Order”), the Court scheduled
a hearing for April 11, 2025 at 3:00 p.m. (the “Settlement Hearing”) to, among other things: (i)
determine whether the proposed Settlement of the Action and the Plan of Allocation on the terms
and conditions provided for in the Stipulation are fair, reasonable, and adequate, and should be
approved by the Court; (ii) determine whether a judgment as provided for in the Stipulation should
be entered; and (iii) rule on Lead Counsel’s Fee and Expense Application;
C. The Court ordered that the Postcard Notice, substantially in the form attached to
the Preliminary Approval Order as Exhibit 4, be mailed by first-class mail, postage prepaid, or
emailed on or before five (5) business days after the first of the month after the date of entry of the
Preliminary Approval Order (“Notice Date”) to all potential Settlement Class Members who could
be identified through reasonable effort, that the long-form Notice of Pendency of Class Action,
Proposed Settlement, and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses (the “Notice”) and Proof of
Claim and Release form (the “Claim Form”), substantially in the forms attached to the Preliminary
Approval Order as Exhibits 1 and 2, be made available to Settlement Class Members; and that the
Summary Notice of Pendency of Class Action, Proposed Settlement, and Motion for Attorneys’
Fees and Expenses (the “Summary Notice”), substantially in the form attached to the Preliminary
Approval Order as Exhibit 3, be published in Investor’s Business Daily and transmitted over PR
Newswire within fourteen (14) calendar days of the Notice Date;
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 3 of 10
D. The notices advised potential Settlement Class Members of the date and purpose of
the Settlement Hearing. The notices further advised that any objections to the Settlement were
required to be filed with the Court and served on counsel for the Parties such that they were
received by March 21, 2025;
E. The provisions of the Preliminary Approval Order as to notice were complied with;
F. On March 7, 2025, Plaintiff moved for final approval of the Settlement, as set forth
in the Preliminary Approval Order. The Settlement Hearing was duly held before this Court on
April 11, 2025 at which time all interested Persons were afforded the opportunity to be heard; and
G. This Court has duly considered Plaintiff’s motion for final approval of the
Settlement, the affidavits, declarations, memoranda of law submitted in support thereof, the
Stipulation, and all of the submissions and arguments presented with respect to the proposed
Settlement;
NOW, THEREFORE, after due deliberation, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND
DECREED that:
1. This Judgment incorporates and makes a part hereof: (i) the Stipulation filed with
the Court on November 8, 2024; and (ii) the notices, which were filed with the Court on November
8, 2024. Capitalized terms not defined in this Judgment shall have the meaning set forth in the
Stipulation.
2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action and all matters
relating to the Settlement, as well as personal jurisdiction over all Parties to the Action, including
all Settlement Class Members.
3. The Court hereby affirms its determinations in the Preliminary Approval Order and
finally certifies, for purposes of the Settlement only, pursuant to Rules 23(a) and (b)(3) of the
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 4 of 10
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Settlement Class of: all persons and entities who or which
purchased or otherwise acquired Stronghold Class A common stock on or before December 20,
2021, pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering Documents issued in connection with the Class A
common stock initial public offering in October 2021, and were damaged thereby. Excluded from
the Settlement Class are: (i) Defendants; (ii) Immediate Families of the Individual Defendants;
(iii) any person who was an officer, director, or control person of Stronghold, and the Underwriter
Defendants (at all relevant times, and members of their Immediate Families); (iv) Stronghold’s
employee retirement and/or benefit plan(s) and their participants and/or beneficiaries to the extent
they purchased or acquired Stronghold Class A common stock through any such plan(s); (v) any
entity in which any Defendant has or had a controlling interest; and (vi) the legal representatives,
heirs, successors, or assigns of any such excluded person or entity. Also excluded from the
Settlement Class are those persons and entities who or which have sought exclusion from the
Settlement Class by submitting a timely and valid request for exclusion. However, any Investment
Vehicle will not be excluded from the Settlement Class.
4. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for purposes of the
Settlement only, the Court hereby re-affirms its determinations in the Preliminary Approval Order
and finally certifies Plaintiff as Class Representative for the Settlement Class and finally appoints
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. as Class Counsel for the Settlement Class.
5. The Court finds that the dissemination and publication of the Postcard Notice,
Notice, Summary Notice, and Claim Form: (i) complied with the Preliminary Approval Order; (ii)
constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances; (iii) constituted notice that was
reasonably calculated to apprise Settlement Class Members of the effect of the Settlement, of the
proposed Plan of Allocation, of Lead Counsel’s request for an award of attorney’s fees and
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 5 of 10
payment of Litigation Expenses incurred in connection with the prosecution of the Action, of
Settlement Class Members’ right to object or seek exclusion from the Settlement Class, and of
their right to appear at the Settlement Hearing; (iv) constituted due, adequate, and sufficient notice
to all Persons entitled to receive notice of the proposed Settlement; and (v) satisfied the notice
requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United States Constitution
(including the Due Process Clause), and Section 27 of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §77z-
1(a)(7).
6. There have been no objections to the Settlement.
7. Pursuant to Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court hereby
approves the Settlement and finds that in light of the benefits to the Settlement Class, the
complexity and expense of further litigation, the risks of establishing liability and damages, and
the costs of continued litigation, said Settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable, and adequate,
having considered and found that: (a) Plaintiff and Lead Counsel have adequately represented the
Settlement Class; (b) the proposal was negotiated at arm’s-length between experienced counsel;
(c) the relief provided for the Settlement Class is adequate, having taken into account (i) the costs,
risks, and delay of trial and appeal; (ii) the effectiveness of any proposed method of distributing
relief to the Settlement Class, including the method of processing Settlement Class Member
claims; (iii) the terms of any proposed award of attorneys’ fees, including timing of payment; and
(iv) any agreement required to be identified under Rule 23(e)(3); and (d) the proposed Plan of
Allocation treats Settlement Class Members equitably relative to each other. Accordingly, the
Settlement is hereby approved in all respects (including, without limitation: the amount of the
Settlement; the releases provided for in the Stipulation; and the dismissal with prejudice of the
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 6 of 10
claims asserted against Defendants) and shall be consummated in accordance with the terms and
provisions of the Stipulation.
8. The Court hereby finds that the proposed Plan of Allocation is a fair and reasonable
method to allocate the Net Settlement Fund among Settlement Class Members, and Class Counsel
and the Claims Administrator are directed to administer the Plan of Allocation in accordance with
its terms and the terms of the Stipulation.
9. The Amended Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Securities Act of 1933,
filed on October 18, 2022 (the “Complaint”), is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, and
without costs to any Party, except as otherwise provided in the Stipulation.
10. The Court finds that during the course of the Action, the Parties and their respective
counsel at all times complied with the requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
11. Upon the Effective Date, Plaintiff and each and every other Settlement Class
Member, on behalf of themselves and each of their respective heirs, executors, trustees,
administrators, predecessors, successors, assigns, and any other Person claiming (now or in the
future) through or on behalf of them, in their capacities as such, (regardless of whether any such
Person ever seeks or obtains by any means, including, without limitation, by submitting a Proof of
Claim, any disbursement from the Settlement Fund), shall be deemed to have, and by operation of
this Judgment shall have, (i) fully, finally, and forever compromised, settled, released, resolved,
relinquished, waived, discharged, and dismissed with prejudice each and every one of the Released
Plaintiff’s Claims against each and every one of the Released Defendant Parties, (ii) covenanted
not to sue any Settling Defendant or Released Defendant Parties with respect to all such Released
Plaintiff’s Claims, and (iii) shall forever be barred and enjoined, to the fullest extent permitted by
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 7 of 10
law, from commencing, instituting, prosecuting, maintaining, or participating in the prosecution
of any action or other proceeding, in any forum, asserting any and all of the Released Plaintiff’s
Claims against any and all of the Released Defendant Parties.
12. Upon the Effective Date, Settling Defendants, on behalf of themselves and each of
their respective heirs, executors, trustees, administrators, predecessors, successors, assigns, and
any other Person claiming (now or in the future) through or on behalf of them, in their capacities
as such, shall be deemed to have, and by operation of this Judgment shall have, (i) fully, finally,
and forever compromised, settled, released, resolved, relinquished, waived, discharged, and
dismissed with prejudice each and every one of the Released Defendants’ Claims against each and
every one of the Released Plaintiff Parties, (ii) covenanted not to sue any Released Plaintiff Party
with respect to all such Released Defendants’ Claims, and (iii) shall forever be barred and enjoined,
to the fullest extent permitted by law, from commencing, instituting, prosecuting, maintaining, or
participating in the prosecution of any action or other proceeding, in any forum, asserting any and
all of the Released Defendants’ Claims against any and all of the Released Plaintiff Parties.
13. Notwithstanding paragraphs 10–11 above, nothing in this Judgment shall bar any
action by any of the Parties to enforce or effectuate the terms of the Stipulation or this Judgment
or any derivative plaintiff in the lawsuit captioned In re Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc.
Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. 1 :23-cv-07840-RA (S.D.N.Y).
14. Each Settlement Class Member, whether or not such Settlement Class Member
executes and delivers a Claim Form, is bound by this Judgment, including, without limitation, the
release of claims as set forth in the Stipulation.
15. This Judgment and the Stipulation, whether or not consummated, and any
discussion, negotiation, proceeding, or agreement relating to the Stipulation, the Settlement, and
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 8 of 10
any matter arising in connection with settlement discussions or negotiations, proceedings, or
agreements, shall not be offered or received against or to the prejudice of the Parties or their
respective counsel, for any purpose other than in an action to enforce the terms hereof, and in
particular:
(a) do not constitute, and shall not be offered or received against or to the
prejudice of any of the Released Defendant Parties as evidence of, or construed as, or deemed to
be evidence of any presumption, concession, or admission by any of the Released Defendant
Parties with respect to the truth of any allegation by Plaintiff and the Settlement Class, or the
validity of any claim that has been or could have been asserted in the Action or in any litigation,
including but not limited to the Released Plaintiff’s Claims, or of any liability, damages,
negligence, fault, or other wrongdoing of any kind by any of the Released Defendant Parties or
any person or entity whatsoever;
(b) do not constitute, and shall not be offered or received against or to the
prejudice of any of the Released Defendant Parties as evidence of a presumption, concession, or
admission of any fault, misrepresentation, or omission with respect to any statement or written
document approved or made by Defendants, or against or to the prejudice of Plaintiff, or any other
member of the Settlement Class as evidence of any infirmity in the claims of Plaintiff, or the other
members of the Settlement Class;
(c) do not constitute, and shall not be offered or received against or to the
prejudice of any of the Released Defendant Parties, Plaintiff, any other member of the Settlement
Class, or their respective counsel, as evidence of a presumption, concession, or admission with
respect to any liability, damages, negligence, fault, infirmity, or other wrongdoing of any kind, or
in any way referred to for any other reason against or to the prejudice of any of the Released
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 9 of 10
Defendant Parties, Plaintiff, other members of the Settlement Class, or their respective counsel, in
any other civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding, other than such proceedings as
may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of the Stipulation;
(d) do not constitute, and shall not be construed against any of the Released
Defendant Parties, Plaintiff, or any other member of the Settlement Class, as an admission or
concession that the consideration to be given hereunder represents the amount that could be or
would have been recovered after trial; and
(e) do not constitute, and shall not be construed as or received in evidence as
an admission, concession, or presumption against Plaintiff, or any other member of the Settlement
Class, that any of their claims are without merit or infirm or that damages recoverable under the
Complaint would not have exceeded the Settlement Amount.
16. The administration of the Settlement, and the decision of all disputed questions of
law and fact with respect to the validity of any claim or right of any Person to participate in the
distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, shall remain under the authority of this Court.
17. In the event that the Settlement does not become effective in accordance with the
terms of the Stipulation, then this Judgment shall be rendered null and void to the extent provided
by and in accordance with the Stipulation and shall be vacated, and in such event, all orders entered
and releases delivered in connection herewith shall be null and void to the extent provided by and
in accordance with the Stipulation, and the Settlement Fund shall be returned in accordance with
paragraph 48 of the Stipulation.
18. Without further order of the Court, the Parties may agree to reasonable extensions
of time to carry out any of the provisions of the Stipulation.
Case 1:22-cv-03088-RA-GS Document 132-2 Filed 04/04/25 Page 10 of 10
19. The Parties are hereby directed to consummate the Stipulation and to perform its
terms.
20. A separate order shall be entered regarding Lead Counsel’s application for
attorneys’ fees and payment of expenses as allowed by the Court. Such order shall in no way
disturb or affect this Judgment and shall be considered separate from this Judgment. Such order
shall in no way affect or delay the finality of this Judgment and shall not affect or delay the
Effective Date of the Settlement.
21. Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any way, this Court hereby retains
continuing jurisdiction over: (i) implementation of the Settlement; (ii) the allowance, disallowance,
or adjustment of any Settlement Class Member’s claim on equitable grounds and any award or
distribution of the Settlement Fund; (iii) disposition of the Settlement Fund; (iv) any applications
for attorneys’ fees, costs, interest, and payment of expenses in the Action; (v) all Parties for the
purpose of construing, enforcing and administering the Settlement and this Judgment; and (vi)
other matters related or ancillary to the foregoing. There is no just reason for delay in the entry of
this Judgment and immediate entry by the Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed.
DATED this _______ day of ______________, 2025
BY THE COURT:
______________________________
Honorable Ronnie Abrams
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
