revenue, fees and costs, and various other relief. On February 21, 2017, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On March 3, 2017, XpresSpa filed a first amended complaint against the defendants. On April 5, 2017, Cordial filed a motion to dismiss. On September 12, 2017, the Court held a hearing on the motion to dismiss. On November 2, 2017, the Court granted the motion to dismiss which was entered on November 13, 2017. On December 22, 2017, XpresSpa filed a notice of appeal, and on September 24, 2018, XpresSpa perfected its appellate rights and submitted a brief to the Supreme Court of New York, First Department appellate court. Oral argument on the appeal went forward on March 20, 2019.
On March 30, 2018, Cordial filed a lawsuit against XpresSpa Group, a subsidiary of XpresSpa Group, and several additional parties in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, alleging the violation of Cordial’s civil rights, tortious interference, breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, conversion, retaliation, and unjust enrichment. Cordial threated to seek punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses, accounting, indemnification, and declaratory judgment as to the status of the membership interests of XpresSpa and Cordial in the joint venture and Cordial’s right to profit distributions and management fees from the joint venture. On May 4, 2018, the defendants moved the lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. On August 9, 2018, the Court granted an additional extension of time for the defendants’ response until September 7, 2018, and thereafter provided another extension pending the Court’s consideration of XpresSpa’s Motion to Stay all action in the Georgia lawsuit, pending resolution of the New York lawsuit and the FAA action. On October 29, 2018, XpresSpa’s Motion to Stay was denied. Prior to resolution of the Motion to Stay, Cordial filed a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO Motion”), seeking to enjoin the defendants and specifically XpresSpa, from, among other things, distributing any cash flow, net profits, or management fees, or otherwise expending resources beyond necessary operating expenses. XpresSpa filed an opposition and, in a decision entered December 26, 2018, the Court denied Cordial’s TRO Motion entirely. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint in its entirety on November 20, 2018.
A Director’s Determination was issued by the FAA in connection with the Part 16 Complaint (“Part 16 Proceeding”) filed by Cordial against the City of Atlanta (“City”) in 2017 (“Director’s Determination”). The Company and Cordial were not parties to the FAA action, and had no opportunity to present evidence or otherwise be heard in such action. The Director’s Determination concluded that the City was not in compliance with certain Federal obligations concerning the federal government’s ACDBE program, including relating to the City’s oversight of the Joint Venture Operating Agreement between the Company and Cordial, Cordial’s termination, and Cordial’s retaliation and harassment claims, and the City was ordered to achieve compliance in accordance with the Director’s Determination. The Director’s Determination does not constitute a Final Agency Decision and it is not subject to judicial review, pursuant to 14 CFR § 16.247(b)(2). Because the Company is not a party to the Part 16 Proceeding, the Company would not be considered “a party adversely affected by the Director’s Determination” with a right of appeal to the FAA Assistant Administrator for Civil Rights.
On August 7, 2019, the Company filed a response, advising the U.S. District Court that: (i) the Company is not party to the FAA proceeding and therefore had no opportunity to present evidence or otherwise be heard in such action; (ii) as non-party, the Company is not bound by the Director’s Determination; and (iii) the FAA cannot dictate the interpretation or enforceability of the contract between Cordial and the Company, which is the subject of the U.S. District Court action initiated by Cordial and the New York State Court action initiated by the Company.
On August 16, 2019, the Court entered an Order granting, in part, the Company’s Motion to Dismiss. The Court dismissed all federal claims alleged in the Complaint against all Defendants, declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) over the remaining state law claims alleged in the Complaint, and remanded the case to the Superior Court of Fulton County. Plaintiffs filed an appeal of the federal court’s decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and the case was docketed on October 15, 2019.
In response to the numerous complaints it received from Cordial, the City of Atlanta required the parties to engage in mediation. On November 22, 2019, a Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement (the "Settlement Agreement") and a Confidential Payment Agreement (the "Payment Agreement") have been executed by the applicable parties. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement, all pending litigation was dismissed. Also, pursuant to the Settlement Agreement terms, the City agreed to approve new five-year leases for the Company and Cordial to operate as joint venture partners for spas located on Concourse A and Concourse C of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport ("together, "Leases"). The city has approved the new Leases, and the Leases have been executed by the Company and the City. The parties are in the process of negotiating and completing an operating agreement. Pursuant to the Payment Agreement, the Company