Brito et al v. TTC MOT, LLC et al
| Rodrigo Roccon, Victor Brito, Antonio Grassi and Pedro Romariz |
| Joseph E. Marsal, TTC MOT, LLC doing business as Florida TTC, Roselene A. Marsal and JMARS Holdings, LLC |
| 9:2020cv82178 |
| November 25, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Dave Lee Brannon |
| Donald M Middlebrooks |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. § 0201 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 19, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
PAPERLESS ORDER granting #13 Motion for Extension of Time, nunc pro tunc. The Parties' Joint Discovery Plan (DE #14 ) shall be deemed timely filed on January 18, 2021. Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 1/19/2021. (kal)
|
|
Filing 15
PAPERLESS ORDER regarding the Parties "Joint Pre-Trial Discovery Plan" (DE #14 ). The Parties' filing apparently seeks a modification of the trial date and/or the deadlines contained in the Pretrial Scheduling Order, as it refers to an "attached Joint Schedule proposed by the Parties" that is not attached to the filing. I decline to continue the trial date or to extend any deadline based upon the present record. Pursuant to Rule 7(b)(1), "[a] request for a court order must be made by motion[,]" which must "state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1). The Scheduling Order may be modified only upon a showing of "good cause." Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). "This good cause standard precludes modification unless the schedule cannot 'be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.'" Sosa v. Airprint Sys., Inc., 133 F.3d 1417, 1418 (11th Cir. 1998) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee's note). If the Parties intend to file a motion to continue the trial date and/or modify the Pretrial Scheduling Order, they are advised that such motion should include specific facts to support the continuance and/or extensions, including an explanation of why they cannot comply with the current litigation schedule, or what specific obstacles the Parties believe they will encounter with respect to delays or problems meeting the current schedule. Additionally, I note that the Parties describe this case as being appropriate for disposition on a "standard track." The Parties are advised that this Court does not generally adhere to the case management tracks set forth in the Local Rules. However, if the Parties wish to be afforded more flexibility in the scheduling of pretrial deadlines and the trial date, they are reminded that at any time they may consent to the jurisdiction of United States Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon. The consent form may be found at Appendix A of the Pretrial Scheduling Order (DE #6 ). Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 1/19/2021. (kal)
|
| Filing 14 Joint SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 16.1 by Victor Brito, Antonio Grassi, Rodrigo Roccon, Pedro Romariz (Bober, Peter) |
| Filing 13 MOTION for Extension of Time for the Parties to File a Joint Discovery Plan by TTC MOT, LLC. Responses due by 1/27/2021 (Garcia-Menocal, Jorge) |
| Filing 12 First AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Antonio Grassi, Victor Brito, Pedro Romariz, Rodrigo Roccon.(Bober, Peter) |
| Filing 11 Statement of: Wages Owed in FLSA Case by Victor Brito, Antonio Grassi, Rodrigo Roccon, Pedro Romariz re #5 Order of Requirements (Bober, Peter) |
|
Filing 10
PAPERLESS ORDER granting in part #8 Defendants' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time. The deadline for Defendants TTC MOT, LLC, Roselene A. Marsal, and Joseph E. Marsal to respond to the Complaint was December 30, 2020. Defendants seek an extension until January 18, 2021, citing only that "counsel has been unable to fully discuss the facts with the Defendants to formulate a response to the Complaint." (DE #8 at 1). Motions to extend litigation deadlines must set forth good cause supported by specific facts. Defendants' Motion is supported by a single conclusory assertion which does not provide the Court with any basis upon which to evaluate whether good cause exists to grant the requested relief. Nevertheless, I will grant the Motion in part because it is unopposed. Accordingly, the deadline for Defendants to respond to the Complaint is extended to January 8, 2021. Future requests for extensions will be denied unless the moving party can establish that a particular deadline could not be met despite diligent efforts. Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 12/31/2020. (kal)
|
| Filing 9 Clerks Notice to Filer re #7 Notice of Attorney Appearance. Attorney Did Not Associate Themselves; ERROR - Filing attorney neglected to associate themselves to the case. The Clerk has added the attorney to the case. It is not necessary to refile this document future filings must comply with the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures and Local Rules by filing a Notice of Attorney Appearance and linking themselves to the case. (pcs) |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer to the Complaint by TTC MOT, LLC. (Garcia-Menocal, Jorge) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jorge Alejandro Garcia-Menocal on behalf of TTC MOT, LLC. Attorney Jorge Alejandro Garcia-Menocal added to party TTC MOT, LLC(pty:dft). (Garcia-Menocal, Jorge) |
|
Filing 6
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION: (Amended Pleadings due by 1/25/2021., Discovery due by 5/17/2021., Joinder of Parties due by 1/25/2021., In Limine Motions due by 6/1/2021., Dispositive Motions due by 6/1/2021., Motions due by 6/1/2021., Pretrial Stipulation due by 7/5/2021.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon on 12/18/2020. See attached document for full details. (pcs)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER SETTING FLSA SCHEDULE Signed by Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon on 12/18/2020. See attached document for full details. (pcs)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER REFERRING CASE AND SETTING TRIAL DATE: (Jury Trial set for 8/2/2021 09:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks., Calendar Call set for 7/28/2021 01:15 PM before Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks.), ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon to enter a Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 12/17/2020. See attached document for full details. (pcs) #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 3 Summons Issued as to Joseph E. Marsal, Roselene A. Marsal, TTC MOT, LLC. (pcs) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks and Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon 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. (pcs) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants. Filing fees $ 400.00 receipt number AFLSDC-13929746, filed by Antonio Grassi, Victor Brito, Pedro Romariz, Rodrigo Roccon. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summon(s))(Bober, Peter) |
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.
