Benlulu et al v. Genger
| Daniel Benlulu, Patrick Wallace and Luca J Schnetzler |
| Sagi Genger |
| 1:2019cv20438 |
| February 1, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Jacqueline Becerra |
| K Michael Moore |
| Rent Lease & Ejectment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 1, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a Motion to Reopen Case #11 and Joint Scheduling Report #10 . On March 20, 2019, this Court entered an Order 9 dismissing the instant matter because the Parties failed to file a joint scheduling report. The Parties have now complied with this Court's Order by filing a Joint Scheduling Report #10 . 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 #11 is GRANTED and the Clerk of the Court shall REOPEN this case. All previously issued orders in this action remain in effect except those inconsistent with this Order. The Parties shall move this Court to reopen any previously filed Motions that were mooted when this case was closed. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/1/2019. (ah03)
|
| Filing 11 Joint MOTION to Reopen Case per Document 9 , #10 and, Joint MOTION to Withdraw Document #8 Response in Opposition to Motion, Document #7 Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, Stay ( Responses due by 4/11/2019) by Sagi Genger. (Wagner, Scott) |
| Filing 10 Joint SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 26(f) by Daniel Benlulu, Luca J Schnetzler, Patrick Wallace (Stone, Todd) |
|
Filing 9
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. On February 4, 2019, this Court entered a Pretrial Order 5 requiring the Parties to file a joint scheduling report within ten (10) days of their joint scheduling conference, which was to be held within twenty (20) days of the date of the Pretrial Order. The Order cautioned, "[f]ailure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report may result in remand or dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. The filing of a motion to dismiss, or other motion, does not toll the time for filing a joint scheduling report." The deadline to file a joint scheduling report has passed and no extension of time has been requested. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to CLOSE this case. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. The Parties may move to reopen this matter upon filing a joint scheduling report. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 3/20/2019. (ah03)
|
| Filing 8 RESPONSE in Opposition re #7 MOTION to Dismiss the State Court Complaint contained within the Notice of Removal #3 Notice (Other), MOTION to Stay MOTION to Change Venue filed by Daniel Benlulu, Luca J Schnetzler, Patrick Wallace. Replies due by 2/26/2019. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(Stone, Todd) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss the State Court Complaint contained within the Notice of Removal #3 Notice (Other), ( Responses due by 2/22/2019), MOTION to Stay ( Responses due by 2/22/2019), MOTION to Change Venue by Sagi Genger. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Composite Exhibit (Connecticut State Court Complaint, Exhibits, Summons and Docket), #2 Exhibit B - Bay Harbour Police Department Report)(Wagner, Scott) |
|
Filing 6
PAPERLESS ORDER REFERRING PRETRIAL DISCOVERY MATTERS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACQUELINE BECERRA. PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. 636 and the Magistrate Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned Cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra 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 Jacqueline Becerra's discovery procedures. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 2/4/2019. (ah03)
|
|
Filing 5
PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER. THIS ORDER has been entered upon the filing of a Notice of Removal. Counsel for the removing party is hereby ORDERED to forward a copy of this Order to all other parties. 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 within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. Within ten (10) days of the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a Joint Scheduling Report. The report shall indicate the proposed month and year for the trial and the estimated number of days required for trial. 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 possibility of 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. Failure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report may result in remand or dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. The filing of a motion to dismiss, or other motion, does not toll the time for filing a joint scheduling report. Counsel for the non-removing party must file a motion to remand the case on the basis of any defect other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction within thirty (30) days after the filing of the Notice of Removal. 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. Pursuant to Administrative Order 2016-70 of the Southern District of Florida and consistent with the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuits Local Rules and Internal Operating Procedures, within three 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 Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 2/4/2019. (ah03)
|
| Filing 4 AMENDED NOTICE OF REMOVAL against Daniel Benlulu, Luca J Schnetzler, Patrick Wallace, filed by Sagi Genger. See DE #3 for image. (kpe) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE by Sagi Genger re #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), Amended Filing to Correct Allegations of Citizenship of Defendant from New York to Connecticut (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Court Docket Documents) (Wagner, Scott) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Chief Judge K. Michael Moore. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra 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. (jao) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT - Complaint for Damages) Filing fee $ 400.00 receipt number 113C-11362734, filed by Sagi Genger. No Answer and/or Motion to Dismiss Filed. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- State Court Pleadings, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Wagner, Scott) Modified on 2/4/2019 (jao). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
