Ballesteros v. Department of Homeland Security
Plaintiff: Ricardo A. Ballesteros
Defendant: Department of Homeland Security
Case Number: 1:2020cv21389
Filed: March 31, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Jacqueline Becerra
Referring Judge: K Michael Moore
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS RSS Track this Docket
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 13, 2020 Filing 9 Summons Issued as to Department of Homeland Security. (cds)
May 13, 2020 Filing 8 Clerks Notice of Receipt of Filing Fee received on 5/13/2020 in the amount of $ 400.00, receipt number FLS100208379. (vt)
May 12, 2020 Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ricardo A. Ballesteros. (ail)
April 29, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/29/2020. See attached document for full details. (mgh)
April 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 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 4/13/2020. (mgh)
April 13, 2020 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. 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 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 4/13/2020. (mgh)
April 1, 2020 Filing 3 Clerk's Notice of Filing Deficiency Re: #1 Complaint, filed by Ricardo A. Ballesteros. Case not filed with required filing fees of $_400.00_ pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1914(a), and the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures. Summons(es) will not be issued until the filing fee is paid or an order granting the Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is entered. (kpe)
March 31, 2020 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. (kpe)
March 31, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Conspiration to Defraud Property against Department of Homeland Security, filed by Ricardo A. Ballesteros. Filing fees $ 400.00. NOT PAID/NO IFP FILED. (Attachments: #1 Summon(s))(kpe) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/1/2020: #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (kpe).

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: Ballesteros v. Department of Homeland Security
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ricardo A. Ballesteros
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: Department of Homeland Security
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?