Ariza v. Lego Brand Retail, Inc.
| Victor Ariza |
| Lego Brand Retail, Inc. |
| 1:2025cv22994 |
| July 3, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Jose E Martinez |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12182 Americans with Disabilities Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 2, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
FINAL ORDER Dismissing Case (With Prejudice) Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 10/1/2025. See attached document for full details. (drz)
|
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice by Victor Ariza (Hannah, Roderick) |
|
Filing 9
Order on Notice of Settlement. Administratively Closing Case. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 8/28/2025. See attached document for full details. (drz)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Settlement [Joint] by Victor Ariza (Hannah, Roderick) |
| Filing 7 PAPERLESS ORDER granting #6 Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall respond to the Complaint on or before August 28, 2025 |
| Set/Reset Response/Answer Due Deadline per DE #7 Order: Lego Brand Retail, Inc. response/answer due 8/28/2025. (caw) |
| Filing 6 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Complaint by Lego Brand Retail, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Kochis, Kymberly) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Kymberly Kochis on behalf of Lego Brand Retail, Inc.. Attorney Kymberly Kochis added to party Lego Brand Retail, Inc.(pty:dft). (Kochis, Kymberly) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Victor Ariza. Lego Brand Retail, Inc. served on 7/8/2025, response/answer due 7/29/2025. (Hannah, Roderick) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Lego Brand Retail, Inc. (wce) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Jose E. Martinez. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Eduardo I. Sanchez 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. (wce) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Lego Brand Retail, Inc.. Filing fees $ 405.00 receipt number AFLSDC-18589859, filed by Victor Ariza. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit, #3 Summon(s))(Hannah, Roderick) |
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
| Search for this case: Ariza v. Lego Brand Retail, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Victor Ariza | |
| Represented By: | Roderick Victor Hannah |
| Represented By: | Pelayo M. Duran |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Lego Brand Retail, Inc. | |
| 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 | [ 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.
