Bittlingmeyer v. Interbond of America, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Carly Bittlingmeyer
Defendant: Interbond of America, LLC doing business as Brandsmart USA of Florida, Inc. and Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc. doing business as Warrantech
Cross Defendant: LG Electronics USA, Inc.
Cross Claimant: Interbond of America, LLC
Case Number: 0:2022cv60955
Filed: May 19, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Lauren Fleischer Louis
Referring Judge: K Michael Moore
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on July 15, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
July 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 35 PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff Interbond of America, LLC's filing of the Amended Cross-Claim Against LG Electronics USA, Inc. #33 . The amended cross-claim moots Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Defendant Interbond of America, LLC's Cross-Claim. #28 . Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the amended cross-claim #33 , the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Defendant Interbond of America, LLC's Cross-Claim #28 is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 7/15/2022. (tgr)
July 14, 2022 Filing 34 Clerk's Notice to Filer re #33 Defendant's MOTION to Amend/Correct Cross-Claim. Wrong Event Selected; ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong event. Clerk corrected the event. It is not necessary to refile this document. (scn)
July 14, 2022 Filing 33 Defendant's AMENDED Cross-Claim by Interbond of America, LLC. (Tacher, Robert) Event type Modified on 7/15/2022 (scn).
July 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 32 PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff Interbond of America, LLC's ("Interbond") Motion to Amend Cross-Claim. #30 . Therein, Interbond requests that the Court permit it to amend its Cross-Claim #12 by clarifying its allegations that "any issues with the repairs as alleged by the Plaintiff, for which Interbond has been sued, were due solely to defective parts supplied by [Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.] for the repair" and that "any failure of any repairs done were due sole to defects in the parts received from LG and not due to any negligence on the part of this Defendant." Id. at 2. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) permits a party to amend its pleadings by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party. The decision to grant or deny a motion to amend pleadings is within the sound discretion of the trial court. Dussouy v. Gulf Coast Inv. Corp., 660 F.2d 594, 598 (5th Cir. 1981). The policy of the federal rules is to permit liberal amendment to facilitate determination of claims on the merits and to prevent litigation from becoming a technical exercise in the fine points of pleading. Id. Thus, unless there is a substantial reason to deny leave to amend, the discretion of the district court is not broad enough to permit denial. Id. A substantial reason could include "undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party, and futility of the amendment." Grayson v. Kmart Corp., 79 F.3d 1086, 1110 (11th Cir. 1996). Here, Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc. does not oppose Interbond's Motion and the Court does not find a substantial reason to deny it. #30 at 2. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff Interbond of America, LLC's Motion to Amend Cross-Claim #30 is GRANTED. Interbond is instructed to file the amended cross-claim separately on the docket on or before July 18, 2022. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 7/14/2022. (tgr)
July 14, 2022 Filing 31 Defendant's MOTION TO DISMISS #1 Complaint FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM , MOTION to Strike Request for Attorneys' Fees ( Responses due by 7/28/2022) by Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Service Agreement)(Glenn, John)
July 13, 2022 Filing 30 Defendant's MOTION to Amend/Correct #12 Cross-Claim by Interbond of America, LLC. Responses due by 7/27/2022 (Tacher, Robert)
July 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 29 PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.'s Amended Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to Defendant Interbond of America, LLC's Crossclaim. #26 . UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.'s Motion #26 is GRANTED. Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc. shall respond to Defendant Interbond of America, LLC's Crossclaim on or before July 7, 2022. Defendant/Cross-Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.'s Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to Defendant Interbond of America, LLC's Crossclaim #25 is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 7/6/2022. (tgr)
July 6, 2022 Filing 28 Defendant's MOTION TO DISMISS #12 Answer to Complaint,, Crossclaim, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by LG Electronics USA, Inc.. Responses due by 7/20/2022 (Kiernan, Michael)
July 6, 2022 Filing 27 Defendant's MOTION TO DISMISS #1 Complaint FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by LG Electronics USA, Inc.. Responses due by 7/20/2022 (Kiernan, Michael)
July 1, 2022 Filing 26 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #12 Answer to Complaint,, Crossclaim, (Amended as to Certification Only) by LG Electronics USA, Inc., LG Electronics USA, Inc.. (Christian, Brandon)
June 30, 2022 Filing 25 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #12 Answer to Complaint,, Crossclaim, by LG Electronics USA, Inc., LG Electronics USA, Inc.. (Christian, Brandon)
June 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 24 PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.'s ("Warrantech") and Defendant LG Electronics USA, Inc.'s ("LGE USA") Unopposed Motions for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint #21 , #23 . Therein, the Warrantech and LGE USA each request a brief extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. See generally #21 , #23 . Plaintiff does not object to either motion. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Warrantech's Motion #21 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART and LGE USA's Motion #23 is GRANTED. Warrantech and LGE USA shall respond to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before July 14, 2022. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/22/2022. (soy)
June 21, 2022 Filing 23 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Complaint by LG Electronics USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Summon(s))(Christian, Brandon)
June 21, 2022 Filing 22 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Brandon Robert Christian on behalf of LG Electronics USA, Inc., LG Electronics USA, Inc.. Attorney Brandon Robert Christian added to party LG Electronics USA, Inc.(pty:dft), Attorney Brandon Robert Christian added to party LG Electronics USA, Inc.(pty:crd). (Christian, Brandon)
June 16, 2022 Filing 21 Amended MOTION to Adopt/Join #17 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint , MOTION for Extension of Time Notice of Serice of Process ( Responses due by 6/30/2022) by Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Rumker, Amanda)
June 16, 2022 Filing 20 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by John Jason Glenn on behalf of Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc. (Glenn, John)
June 16, 2022 Filing 19 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Amanda Rumker on behalf of Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.. Attorney Amanda Rumker added to party Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.(pty:dft). (Rumker, Amanda)
June 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 18 PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Warrantech Consumer Product Services' ("Warrantech") Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. #17 . Therein, Warrantech requests a brief extension of time to respond to the Complaint because "Counsel for Warrantech inadvertently calendared the wrong deadline for responding to Plaintiff's Complaint." See id. at 1. However, Plaintiff has not filed a Notice of Return of Service in this matter as to any Defendant, and the Court is therefore unable to determine what the deadline is for Defendants to respond to the Complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) (providing that a defendant must respond to a complaint within 21 days after being served with the summons and complaint); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)(1) ("Unless service is waived, proof of service must be made to the court. Except for service by a United States marshal or deputy marshal, proof must be by the server's affidavit."). The Court cannot extend a deadline which does not exist. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion #17 is DENIED. The Parties are encouraged to review and comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(a) and 4(l). The Clerk of Court is further INSTRUCTED to STRIKE #15 . Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/15/2022. (soy)
June 15, 2022 Filing 17 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint by Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.. Attorney John Jason Glenn added to party Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.(pty:dft). (Glenn, John)
June 14, 2022 Filing 16 Clerks Notice to Filer re #15 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint re #1 Complaint. Wrong Motion Relief(s) Selected; ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong motion relief(s) when docketing the motion. The correction was made by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document but future motions filed must include applicable reliefs. (ls)
June 14, 2022 Filing 15 (STRICKEN per DE 18 Paperless Order) Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Complaint by LG Electronics USA, Inc.. Responses due by 6/28/2022 (Kiernan, Michael) Modified Relief on 6/14/2022 (ls). Text Modified on 6/16/2022 (amb).
June 14, 2022 Filing 14 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael Keegan Kiernan on behalf of LG Electronics USA, Inc.. Attorney Michael Keegan Kiernan added to party LG Electronics USA, Inc.(pty:dft). (Kiernan, Michael)
June 9, 2022 Filing 13 NOTICE of Change of Address, Email or Law Firm Name by Robert F. Tacher (Tacher, Robert)
June 9, 2022 Filing 12 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint with Jury Demand , CROSSCLAIM against Carly Bittlingmeyer by Interbond of America, LLC. Attorney Robert F. Tacher added to party Interbond of America, LLC(pty:dft). (Tacher, Robert)
June 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 PAPERLESS ORDER VACATING #9 DISCOVERY PROCEDURES ORDER. Parties are instructed to review the Discovery Practices and Procedures that can be found on the undersigned's webpage. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 6/8/2022. (pdy)
June 8, 2022 Filing 10 Case Reassignment of Paired Magistrate Judge pursuant to Administrative Order(s) - 2022-47 to Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis. Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss no longer assigned to case. (bms)
June 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 VACATED per DE# 11 , ISCOVERY PROCEDURES ORDER (Signed by Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss on 6/3/2022). (See attached document for full details). (at) Modified text on 6/9/2022 (jas).
June 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 PAPERLESS Order Vacating DE #6 . An order regarding Judge Strauss's discovery procedures will follow. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss on 6/3/2022. (ab03)
June 1, 2022 Filing 7 Case Reassignment of Paired Magistrate Judge to Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss. Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow no longer assigned to case. (jmd)
May 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 VACATED per DE# 8 , GENERAL ORDER ON DISCOVERY OBJECTIONS AND PROCEDURES Signed by Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow on 5/27/2022. See attached document for full details. (ail) Modified text on 6/3/2022 (jas).
May 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 PAPERLESS ORDER REFERRING PRETRIAL DISCOVERY MATTERS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE LURANA S. SNOW. PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. 636 and the Magistrate Judge Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned Cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to any and all pretrial discovery matters. Any motion affecting deadlines set by the Court's Scheduling Order is excluded from this referral, unless specifically referred by separate Order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall comply with Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow's discovery procedures, which the parties shall be advised of by the entry of an Order. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 5/25/2022. (tgr)
May 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER. This order has been entered upon the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is hereby ORDERED to forward to all defendants, upon receipt of a responsive pleading, a copy of this Order. It is further ORDERED that S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1 shall apply to this case and the parties shall hold a scheduling conference no later than twenty (20) days after the filing of the first responsive pleading by the last responding defendant, or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint, whichever occurs first. However, if all defendants have not been served by the expiration of this deadline, Plaintiff shall move for an enlargement of time to hold the scheduling conference, not to exceed 90 days from the filing of the Complaint. Within ten (10) days of the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a joint scheduling report. Failure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report within the deadlines set forth above may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. The parties should note that the time period for filing a joint scheduling report is not tolled by the filing of any other pleading, such as an amended complaint or Rule 12 motion. The scheduling conference may be held via telephone. At the conference, the parties shall comply with the following agenda that the Court adopts from S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1: (1) Documents (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.1 and 2) - The parties shall determine the procedure for exchanging a copy of, or a description by category and location of, all documents and other evidence that is reasonably available and that a party expects to offer or may offer if the need arises. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B). (a) Documents include computations of the nature and extent of any category of damages claimed by the disclosing party unless the computations are privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(C). (b) Documents include insurance agreements which may be at issue with the satisfaction of the judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(D). (2) List of Witnesses - The parties shall exchange the name, address and telephone number of each individual known to have knowledge of the facts supporting the material allegations of the pleading filed by the party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(A). The parties have a continuing obligation to disclose this information. (3) Discussions and Deadlines (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.2) - The parties shall discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case. Failure to comply with this Order or to exchange the information listed above may result in sanctions and/or the exclusion of documents or witnesses at the time of trial. S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.I. The parties are hereby on notice that this Court requires all filings to be formatted in 12 point Times New Roman font and double spaced, including any footnotes, with one inch margins on all sides. Failure to follow these formatting guidelines may result in the filing being stricken, any opposing filing being granted by default, and the imposition of other sanctions, including attorney's fees and costs. Multiple Plaintiffs or Defendants shall file joint motions with co-parties unless there are clear conflicts of position. If conflicts of position exist, parties shall explain the conflicts in their separate motions. Failure to comply with ANY of these procedures may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions, including but not limited to, the striking of the motion or dismissal of this action. The parties shall seek extensions of time in a timely fashion. "A motion for extension of time is not self-executing.... Yet, by filing these motions on or near the last day, and then sitting idle pending the Court's disposition of the motion, parties essentially grant their own motion. The Court will not condone this." Compere v. Nusret Miami, LLC, 2020 WL 2844888, at *2 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2020) (internal citations omitted). Pursuant to Administrative Order 2016-70 of the Southern District of Florida and consistent with the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit's Local Rules and Internal Operating Procedures, within three (3) days of the conclusion of a trial or other proceeding, parties must file via CM/ECF electronic versions of documentary exhibits admitted into evidence, including photographs of non-documentary physical exhibits. The Parties are directed to comply with each of the requirements set forth in Administrative Order 2016-70 unless directed otherwise by the Court.Telephonic appearances are not permitted for any purpose. Upon reaching a settlement in this matter the parties are instructed to notify the Court by telephone and to file a Notice of Settlement within twenty-four (24) hours. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 5/25/2022. (tgr)
May 20, 2022 Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Interbond of America, LLC, LG Electronics USA, Inc., Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc.. (ail)
May 19, 2022 Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge K. Michael Moore. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. Pro se (NON-PRISONER) litigants may receive Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFS) via email after filing a Consent by Pro Se Litigant (NON-PRISONER) to Receive Notices of Electronic Filing. The consent form is available under the forms section of our website. (ail)
May 19, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants. Filing fees $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-15651838, filed by Carly Bittlingmeyer. (Attachments: #1 Summon(s), #2 Summon(s), #3 Summon(s), #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Simil, Jennifer)

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 Florida Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bittlingmeyer v. Interbond of America, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carly Bittlingmeyer
Represented By: Jibrael Jarallah Said Hindi
Represented By: Jennifer Gomes Simil
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: Interbond of America, LLC doing business as Brandsmart USA of Florida, Inc.
Represented By: Robert F. Tacher
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: Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc. doing business as Warrantech
Represented By: Amanda Rumker
Represented By: John Jason Glenn
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 ]
Cross defendant: LG Electronics USA, Inc.
Represented By: Brandon Robert Christian
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 ]
Cross claimant: Interbond of America, LLC
Represented By: Robert F. Tacher
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?