Campos v. Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. et al
| Ilsie Campos |
| Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc., Publicis Groupe S.A. and Ricardo Fragale |
| 1:2025cv22257 |
| May 16, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Enjolique A Lett |
| Kathleen M Williams |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 22, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 47 STIPULATION of Dismissal with Prejudice (Joint) by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. (Penichet, Paul) |
Filing 46
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Parties' Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Dismissal Documents ("Motion") (DE #45 ). In the Motion, the Parties request a one-week extension to their deadline to file the appropriate dismissal documents. The Motion was filed on the day of the deadline and is therefore noncompliant with the Court's Practices and Procedures, which state, "[a]bsent an emergency, requests for extensions of time must be presented to the Court, by motion, no later than 48 hours prior to the deadline from which the Parties are seeking relief." If an extension of time was needed, the Parties should have filed a timely request for such an extension. The Parties do not claim any emergency occurred that prevented their timely request for an extension.Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Parties shall file their dismissal documents on or before October 22, 2025. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 10/17/2025. (ymd)
|
| Filing 45 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Dismissal Documents re 44 Order,,,,, Terminate Motions,,,,, Order Dismissing/Closing Case,,,, by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. Responses due by 10/31/2025. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Sarangoulis, Roman) |
|
Filing 44
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS MATTER is before the Court on the notice indicating that the Parties have reached a settlement. (DE #43 .) Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that on or before October 17, 2025, the Parties shall file a joint stipulation of dismissal. If the Parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction beyond the filing of their joint stipulation, they are advised that they must file the settlement agreement for review and any stipulation must comply with the Eleventh Circuit's holding in Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2012). Otherwise, the dismissal of this matter is effective and self-executing upon the filing of the Parties' joint stipulation of dismissal. Id. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. All hearings, trial settings, and deadlines are CANCELED. This case is CLOSED for administrative purposes. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 9/12/2025. (ymd)
|
| Filing 43 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 41 Order,,,,,, Order to Show Cause,,,,, by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. (Sarangoulis, Roman) |
| Filing 42 NOTICE of Settlement (Joint) by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. (Sarangoulis, Roman) |
|
Filing 41
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte. On August 14, 2025, the Mediator filed a Report indicating that this case was settled in full (DE #40 ). Under S.D. Fla. Local Rule 16.4, counsel for the Parties were required to "notify the Court of such settlement by filing and serving a notice of settlement within two (2) Court days of such agreement being reached. The notice shall be filed and served jointly by counsel for all parties to the settlement. Alternatively, the parties may file and serve a notice or stipulation, as applicable, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41. But unless such notice or stipulation is filed within two (2)Court days of the parties reaching a settlement, the parties are still required to file and serve a separate notice of settlement." See also Local Rule 16.2(f)(2) (requiring parties to file a notice of settlement for settlements reached through mediation). Nearly a month later, the Parties have yet to file the required notice. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Parties shall SHOW CAUSE by 12:00 p.m. on September 12, 2025 as to why they should not be sanctioned for their lack of compliance with the Local Rules. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 9/10/2025. (ymd)
|
| Filing 40 FINAL MEDIATION REPORT held before Mediator Marlene Quintana. Prepared by: Marlene Quintana. Filed by Marlene Quintana. Disposition: Settled in full. Mediation held/partially held via video-conference. (Quintana, Marlene) |
|
Filing 39
PAPERLESS ORDER granting #38 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Enjolique A. Lett on 8/11/2025. (mwn)
|
| Filing 38 Plaintiff's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #35 MOTION to Dismiss Count VII of the Complaint by Ilsie Campos. (Falzon, Anthony) |
|
Filing 37
ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY PROCEDURES Signed by Magistrate Judge Enjolique A. Lett on 8/1/2025. See attached document for full details. (mwn)
|
| Filing 36 Case Reassignment of Paired Magistrate Judge pursuant to Administrative Order(s) - 2025-52A to Magistrate Judge Enjolique A. Lett. Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman no longer assigned to case. (mno) |
| Filing 35 MOTION to Dismiss Count VII of the Complaint by Ricardo Fragale, Publicis Groupe S.A., Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. Responses due by 8/12/2025. (Sarangoulis, Roman) |
|
Filing 34
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants Publicis Groupe S.A. and Ricardo Fragale's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (DE #33 ) ("Motion"). In the Motion, Defendants seek an extension until July 29, 2025 to align their response deadline with the response deadline for Defendant Starcom. Upon review of the Motion and the record, and in light of the fact that the Motion is unopposed, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion is GRANTED. Pursuant to the Court's Referral Order (DE #3 ), Defendants shall file a joint response on or before July 29, 2025. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 6/24/2025. (ymd)
|
| Filing 33 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to 25 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal by Ricardo Fragale, Publicis Groupe S.A.. Attorney Roman Alan Sarangoulis added to party Ricardo Fragale(pty:dft), Attorney Roman Alan Sarangoulis added to party Publicis Groupe S.A.(pty:dft). (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Sarangoulis, Roman) |
| Filing 32 Joint NOTICE of Mediator Selection and Hearing. Selected/Added Marlene Quintana as Mediator. Mediation Hearing set for 08/13/25 at 10:00 a.m.. (Penichet, Paul) |
| Filing 31 RESPONSE in Opposition re #24 Plaintiff's MOTION to Remand to State Court filed by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. Replies due by 6/27/2025. (Penichet, Paul) |
| Filing 30 PAPERLESS ORDER striking #29 Plaintiff's EXPEDITED MOTION for extension of all deadlines during the period of June 20, 2025 through July 9, 2025.The instant motion is tantamount to a notice of unavailability. See, id. at ¶ 1 ("Counsel for the Plaintiff, who is a solo practitioner, has long standing plans to visit family overseas between June 20, 2025 and July 8, 2025 and would request that the [C]ourt refrain from scheduling hearings during said period and allow him an enlargement of time to respond to any motion or comply with any other deadlines that may fall during said period." (footnote omitted)). Plaintiff even acknowledges that notices of unavailability are prohibited under Rule 1B of this Court's Practices and Procedures in Civil Cases. Id. at 2 n.1. Neither the Local Rules nor the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorize the filing of a notice of unavailability (or the functional equivalent of such a notice). See Ibezim v. GEO Grp., Inc., No. 17-80572-CIV, 2019 WL 1566507, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 15, 2019) (stating that notices of unavailability "have no effect in federal court"), aff'd, 786 F. App'x 975 (11th Cir. 2019). Additionally, the Court is unwilling to undertake the responsibility of keeping track of the whereabouts of parties or their counsel in every case before it.Moreover, the motion (to the extent it is a notice of unavailability) violates Judge Williams' Court Practices and Procedures. See Judge Williams' Court Practices and Procedures (available at the Court's website: https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/content/judge-kathleen-m-williams ("The Court will not accept notices of unavailability... or other [ ] documents or filings not contemplated by the Federal or Local Rules. If filed to the docket, these documents will be stricken. For example, notices of unavailability will not be construed as motions to continue or otherwise operate to change the Court's schedule in any way.")).If a party wishes to move a hearing, trial, or other deadline set by the Court, then an appropriate motion must be filed. A blanket motion for continuance or extension of time that does not refer to a specific deadline, hearing or a trial date is inappropriate.This motion is also problematic because it was filed as an expedited motion even though the motion acknowledges that "[t]his Motion is being filed in an abundance of caution because at present there are no court hearings scheduled during the period in question, nor are there any pending motions that require a response." Id. at ¶ 1. This is especially troubling because the Undersigned already admonished Plaintiff's counsel on May 30, 2025 for docketing a motion as "expedited" when it did not appear that the motion warranted expedited attention. See ECF No. 12. The Undersigned even explained to Plaintiff's counsel that filing a motion as expedited "causes the Court to, in effect, drop everything and go on high alert." Id. Evidently, Plaintiff's counsel is unconcerned with how filing an expedited motion (when it does not call for expedited attention) impacts the Court's workload priorities. The timing of the motion is also problematic. The motion was filed today and concerns "longstanding plans" for an overseas family vacation starting on June 20. Given counsel's use of the term "long standing plans," the planning for this trip surely began, at a minimum, many weeks ago (and probably several months ago). Yet counsel waited until only four days before the vacation is scheduled to begin to file his motion to extend deadlines (non-existent as they may be) arising during the overseas vacation. Counsel's motion is therefore untimely and demonstrates a lack of diligence.Lastly, to the extent Plaintiff requests a 20-day stay of all deadlines (even though Plaintiff represents that the "Motion is being filed in an abundance of caution"), the instant motion is stricken because it is not supported by a memorandum of law. With limited exceptions, a request for relief must be supported by legal authority. See S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(a)(1); see also Flanigan's Enters., Inc. of Ga. v. Fulton Cnty., Ga., 242 F.3d 976, 987 (11th Cir. 2001) (holding that a party waives an argument if the party "fail[s] to elaborate or provide any citation of authority in support" of the argument).Going forward, the Undersigned expects strict compliance with the rules, practices, and procedures of this Court and continued non-compliance may result in sanctions. Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on 6/16/2025. (mkr) |
| Filing 29 Plaintiff's EXPEDITED MOTION for extension of all deadlines during the period June 20, 2025 through July 9, 2025 re #16 Scheduling Order,,, Case Referred to Mediation,, by Ilsie Campos. (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 28 PAPERLESS ORDER granting #27 Plaintiff's MOTION to Strike #23 Plaintiff's MOTION to Remand to State Court by Ilsie Campos. The instant motion to strike is unopposed. Accordingly, #23 Plaintiff's MOTION to Remand to State Court is stricken. Plaintiff filed a corrected #24 MOTION to Remand to State Court, which remains pending with the Court. Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on 6/16/2025. (mkr) |
| Filing 27 Plaintiff's MOTION to Strike #23 Plaintiff's MOTION to Remand to State Court by Ilsie Campos. Responses due by 6/30/2025. (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 26 Clerk's Notice to Filer re #22 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal. Wrong Filer Name(s) Selected; ERROR - The wrong filer name was selected. The correction was made by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document. See DE 25 . (cqs) |
| Filing 24 Plaintiff's MOTION to Remand to State Court by Ilsie Campos. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Starcom Notice of Commencement and Waiver of Service, #2 Exhibit Publicis Notice of Commencement and Waiver of Service, #3 Exhibit Fragale Notice of Commencement and Waiver of Service, #4 Exhibit Fedex Tracking Receipt for Notices of Commencement and Waivers of Service, #5 Exhibit Evidence of Fragale Homestead in Broward County, Florida)(Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 25 AMENDED COMPLAINT (for image see DE#22) against Ricardo Fragale, Publicis Groupe S.A., Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc., filed by Ilsie Campos.(cqs) |
| Filing 23 Plaintiff's MOTION to Remand to State Court by Ilsie Campos. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Starcom Notice of Commencement and Waiver of Service, #2 Exhibit Publicis Notice of Commencement and Waiver of Service, #3 Exhibit Fragale Notice of Commencement and Waiver of Service, #4 Exhibit Fragale evidence of Homestead in Broward County, Florida)(Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 22 Plaintiff's AMENDED COMPLAINT against Ilsie Campos, filed by Ilsie Campos.(Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 21 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Ilsie Campos. (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 20 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Ilsie Campos. Publicis Groupe S.A. served on 6/5/2025, response/answer due 6/26/2025. (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 19 PAPERLESS ORDER granting #18 Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to #1 Complaint by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. ("Starcom"). Starcom seeks an extension of time, through and including July 29, 2025, to file a response to Plaintiff's Complaint. The instant motion is unopposed and complies with Judge Williams' 48-hour rule. See Judge Williams' Court Practices and Procedures (available at the Court's website: https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/content/judge-kathleen-m-williams). Starcom will have until July 29, 2025 to file on CM/ECF its response to Plaintiff's #1 Complaint. However, because this is Starcom's second extension, no further extensions will be granted absent compelling circumstances bordering on a genuine emergency. Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on 6/10/2025. (mkr) |
| Filing 18 Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), (Unopposed) by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Sarangoulis, Roman) |
| Filing 17 Summons Issued as to Publicis Groupe S.A.. (ls) |
|
Filing 16
SCHEDULING ORDER: ( Jury Trial set for 6/1/2026 in Miami Division before Judge Kathleen M. Williams., Calendar Call set for 5/26/2026 11:00 AM in Miami Division before Judge Kathleen M. Williams.). Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 5/30/2025. See attached document for full details. (ls) #Pattern Jury Instruction Builder - To access the latest, up to date changes to the 11th Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions go to https://pji.ca11.uscourts.gov or click here.
|
| Filing 15 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Ilsie Campos. Ricardo Fragale waiver sent on 5/7/2025, response/answer due 7/7/2025. (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 14 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Ilsie Campos. Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. waiver sent on 5/7/2025, response/answer due 7/7/2025. (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) addressed to Publicis Groupe S.A. by Ilsie Campos re #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), filed by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Summon(s) Publicis Groupe S.A.) (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 12 PAPERLESS ORDER striking #10 Plaintiff's MOTION to Expedite the issuance of summonses by the Clerk of Court addressed to all three Defendants by Ilsie Campos (emphasis added). Although the word "expedite" does not appear in the title of the motion on the motion itself, it does appear on the CM/ECF docket. Someone from Plaintiff's counsel's office must have added this word, which causes the Court to, in effect, drop everything and go on high alert. This motion violates Local Rule 7.1(d)(2), which governs expedited motions: A filer whose time-sensitive motion does not qualify as an emergency motion but who nonetheless requires an expedited ruling by a date certain may file an expedited motion in lieu of an emergency motion. The motion must include the words "Expedited Motion" in the title and must set forth in detail the date by which an expedited ruling is needed and the reason the ruling is needed by the stated date.S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(d)(2) (emphasis added). The instant motion fails to include "the words 'Expedited Motion' in the title" or explain the circumstances which warrant expedited relief. Additionally, there is a specific event on CM/ECF titled "notice of filing proposed summonses" which is the appropriate way to bring proposed summonses to the Clerk's attention.If this is not a true expedited or emergent situation (and it does not appear to be, as a notice designed to cause a summons to be issued is a garden-variety event), then Plaintiff may re-file her request for the issuance of summonses by filing a notice with the proposed summonses attached and selecting the correct event on CM/ECF. If, on the other hand, this is a true expedited situation (which appears highly unlikely), then Plaintiff must follow the instructions provided by the Local Rules. Going forward, the Undersigned expects strict compliance with the rules, practices, and procedures of this Court. Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on 5/30/2025. (mkr) |
| Filing 11 Joint SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 26(f) by Ilsie Campos (Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 10 Plaintiff's MOTION to Expedite the issurance of summonses by the Clerk of Court addressed to all three Defendants by Ilsie Campos. (Attachments: #1 Summon(s) Starcom Media Vest Group Inc., #2 Summon(s) Publicis Groupe S.A., #3 Summon(s) Ricardo Fragale)(Falzon, Anthony) |
| Filing 9 Defendant's NOTICE of Filing State Pleadings by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. re #4 Clerk's Notice of Docket Correction - Chambers and Clerks, (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Complaint, #3 Exhibit Notice of Filing Removal (State)) (Sarangoulis, Roman) |
| Filing 8 STATUS REPORT Removal Status Report by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. (Sarangoulis, Roman) |
| Filing 7 MAGISTRATE JUDGE GOODMAN'S DISCOVERY PROCEDURES ORDER. Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on 5/22/2025. See attached document for full details. (fbn) |
| Filing 6 PAPERLESS ORDER granting #5 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to #1 Complaint by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc. ("Starcom"). Starcom seeks an extension of time, through and including June 12, 2025, to file a response to Plaintiff's Complaint. Plaintiff does not oppose the motion. Starcom states that its "response to the Complaint is due on or before May 23, 2025," but in a footnote clarifies that "[it] has not been formally served with the Complaint, but it is seeking this extension out of an abundance of caution since this matter was removed to this Court on May 16, 2025." Id. at 2, & n.1. Thus, the instant motion does not violate Judge Williams' 48-hour rule. See Judge Williams' Court Practices and Procedures (available at the Court's website: https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/content/judge-kathleen-m-williams). The Undersigned is referencing this rule, however, to ensure continued future compliance.Because the instant motion is unopposed and does not violate the 48-hour rule, Starcom will have until June 12, 2025 to file on CM/ECF its response to Plaintiff's #1 Complaint. Signed by Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on 5/22/2025. (mkr) |
| Filing 5 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Sarangoulis, Roman) |
| Filing 4 Clerk's Notice of Docket Correction re #3 Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge. Corrected Document Replaced Due to Error per Chambers. A copy(s) of the correct/original documents has/have been attached to this notice for the attorneys/parties convenience. (sk) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Ch. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman for Discovery and Pretrial Non-Dispositive Matters and Notice of Court Practices and Procedures. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 5/19/2025. See attached document for full details. (ls) (Main Document 3 replaced on 5/19/2025) (sk).
|
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Kathleen M. Williams. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman 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. (blc) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT - Complaint) Filing fee $ 405.00 receipt number AFLSDC-18456037, filed by Starcom Mediavest Group, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Court Complaint & Other State Court Documents, #2 Exhibit B - Declaration of Valentina Lantigua, #3 Exhibit C - Florida Bar Profile, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Sarangoulis, Roman). No Answer/Motion to Dismiss filed. Modified on 5/16/2025 (blc). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
