Garcia v. Altice Technical Services, LLC
Plaintiff: Jose Garcia
Defendant: Altice Technical Services, LLC doing business as Optimum
Case Number: 3:2021cv00522
Filed: April 15, 2021
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Presiding Judge: Jeffrey A Meyer
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 3, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 22 NOTICE of Appearance by Joseph William Fazzino on behalf of Altice Technical Services, LLC (Fazzino, Joseph)
June 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 21 Joint REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Shea, James)
May 24, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) by Altice Technical Services, LLC.(Shea, James)
May 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 19 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Jose Garcia. (Bochanis, John)
April 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER granting #17 Motion for Extension of Time until May 24, 2021 to respond to complaint. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/27/2021. (Freberg, B)
April 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Answer deadline updated for Altice Technical Services, LLC to 5/24/2021. (Freberg, B)
April 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 17 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time until May 24, 2021 to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint 13 Order on Motion for Extension of Time,,,, by Altice Technical Services, LLC. (Shea, James)
April 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 16 Amended NOTICE by Altice Technical Services, LLC re #15 Notice of Removal, 14 Order to Show Cause,,,,,,, Revised Statement Regarding Removal (Shea, James)
April 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 15 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Altice Technical Services, LLC from Connecticut Superior Court, JD of Fairfield at Bridgeport, case number FBT-CV21-6105694-S. Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ACTDC-6484367, filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC.(Shea, James)
April 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED TO STATE COURT. Defendant has filed a notice of removal contending that there is federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332 and claiming that defendant "Altice Technical Services US, LLC ('ATS') is a limited liability corporation incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in the state of New York." Doc. #1 at 2. The defendant, however, references an exhibit attachment that provides incorporation for a company with a different name ("Altice Technical Services U.S. Corp.") than either the name identified in the caption of the complaint ("Altice Technical Services, LLC") or in defendant's own notice of removal ("Altice Technical Services US, LLC"). In addition, having claimed that the defendant is a limited liability company, defendant's notice of removal incorrectly claims that the defendant's state of citizenship should be adjudged by reference to its state of incorporation and principal place of business rather than by reference to the state of citizenship of each and every member of the limited liability company. See See, e.g., Bayerische Landesbank, New York Branch v. Aladdin Capital Mgmt. LLC, 692 F.3d 42, 49 (2d Cir. 2012); Handelsman v. Bedford Village Ltd. Partnership, LLC, 213 F.3d 48, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000). Defendant's notice of removal fails to identify the members of the limited liability compay. Nor does defendants notice of removal explain the citizenship of the alleged successor company, CSC Holdings, LLC. Defendant may file any response to this order to show cause on or before April 26, 2021, and the Court is likely to remand this action in the absence of a clear showing of a basis for federal jurisdiction. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/19/2021.(Freberg, B)
April 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO FILING A MOTION THAT COMPLIES WITH THE COURTS RULES. The Court DENIES without prejudice defendant's motion for extension of time (Doc. #[7)]. The motion states that "[p]laintiff's counsel has been contacted, however at the time of this filing, Defendant has been unable to ascertain Plaintiff's position on the granting of this Motion." Doc. #7 at 2. This statement does not satisfy the requirement of D. Conn. Local Rule 7(b) which requires that a motion for extension of time either state the position of opposing counsel or state that "despite diligent effort, including making the inquiry in sufficient time to afford non-movant a reasonable opportunity to respond, the movant cannot ascertain the position(s) of the non-movant(s)." The motion fails to state any facts suggesting diligent effort or that plaintiff's counsel was allowed a sufficient time to respond. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/19/2021. (Freberg, B)
April 16, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #4 Notice (Other) filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #5 Notice (Other), filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #2 Notice of Appearance filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #11 Notice, #6 Corporate Disclosure Statement, filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #3 Notice (Other), filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #9 Electronic Filing Order, #10 Protective Order, #7 MOTION for Extension of Time until May 24, 2021 to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC, #8 Order on Pretrial Deadlines Signed by Clerk on 4//16/2021. (Attachments: #1 Standing Order on Removed Cases)(Freberg, B)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Set Deadlines:. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 5/3/2021 (Gutierrez, Y.)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 11 NOTICE re Initial Discovery Protocols. Signed by Clerk on 4/15/2021. (Attachments: #1 Discovery Attachment)(Freberg, B)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/15/2021.(Freberg, B)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/15/2021.(Freberg, B)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 6/14/2021 Discovery due by 10/15/2021 Dispositive Motions due by 11/19/2021 Signed by Clerk on 4/16/2021.(Freberg, B)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer added. (Nuzzi, Tiffany)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MOTION for Extension of Time until May 24, 2021 to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint #1 Notice of Removal, by Altice Technical Services, LLC. (Shea, James)
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Altice Technical Services, LLC identifying Corporate Parent Altice USA, Inc., Other Affiliate Cablevision Systems Corporation, Other Affiliate CSC Holdings, LLC for Altice Technical Services, LLC . (Shea, James) Modified on 4/15/2021 to correct party(Hushin, Z.).
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 NOTICE by Altice Technical Services, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, Statement Regarding Removal (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Altice Secretary of State Filing, #2 Exhibit B - CSC Holdings Secretary of State Filing, #3 Exhibit C - CableVision Secretary of State Filing)(Shea, James) Modified on 4/15/2021 to correct party(Hushin, Z.).
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 4 NOTICE by Altice Technical Services, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, Notice of No Pending Motions (Shea, James) Modified on 4/15/2021 to correct party (Hushin, Z.).
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 NOTICE by Altice Technical Services, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, Certificate of Filing and Service of Petition for Removal (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - CT Superior Court Notice of Filing Removal)(Shea, James) Modified on 4/15/2021 to correct party (Hushin, Z.).
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by James F. Shea on behalf of Altice Technical Services, LLC (Shea, James) Modified on 4/15/2021 to correct party (Hushin, Z.).
April 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Altice Technical Services, LLC from Connecticut Superior Court, JD of Fairfield at Bridgeport, case number Docket Number Not Assigned Yet. Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ACTDC-6472701, filed by Altice Technical Services, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - CT Superior Court Complaint, #2 Exhibit B - Altice Secretary of State Filing)(Shea, James) Modified on 4/15/2021 to correct party (Hushin, Z.).

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Garcia v. Altice Technical Services, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jose Garcia
Represented By: John T. Bochanis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Altice Technical Services, LLC doing business as Optimum
Represented By: James F. Shea
Represented By: Joseph William Fazzino
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?