Flancbaum et al v. The Tyson Group, Inc.
| Morris Flancbaum and Susan Rizzuto |
| The Tyson Group, Inc. |
| 9:2021cv81270 |
| July 21, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| William Matthewman |
| Donald M Middlebrooks |
| Negotiable Instrument |
| 12 U.S.C. § 1821 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Reset Deadlines as to #19 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction #1 Complaint, MOTION to Change Venue . Responses due by 9/27/2021 (ls)(per DE #24) |
Filing 24
PAPERLESS ORDER SETTING DEADLINE FOR FILING CLOSING DOCUMENTS AND EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS TO RESPOND TO #19 MOTION TO DISMISS. Plaintiffs have filed a Notice of Pending Settlement (DE #23 ), and the Court congratulates the Parties on their early and amicable resolution of this matter. The Parties' request for 14 days to file closing documents is granted. They are therefore directed to file for dismissal on or before September 27, 2021. Until closing documents are filed, all litigation deadlines will remain active. However, in view of the pending settlement, I will grant Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (DE #22 ). Accordingly, if no dismissal is filed by September 27, 2021, then Plaintiffs shall respond to the Motion to Dismiss (DE #19 ) by that date. The Parties are also advised that they may move for the Court to retain jurisdiction upon closing the case if necessary to enforce the terms of their settlement agreement. Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 9/13/2021. (kal)
|
| Filing 23 NOTICE of Settlement (Pending) by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto (Osherow, Mark) |
| Filing 22 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #19 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction #1 Complaint, MOTION to Change Venue by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto. (Osherow, Mark) |
|
Filing 21
PAPERLESS ORDER regarding the Parties' Joint Scheduling Report. (DE #20 ). Pursuant to the directives contained in the Court's Pretrial Scheduling Order (DE #15 ), the Parties have filed their Joint Scheduling Report. In addition to addressing the matters required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and the Court's Order, the Parties' Joint Scheduling Report also proposes some deadlines that conflict with the deadlines contained in the Pretrial Scheduling Order. In the Report, the Defendant also states that it objects to the timing of Rule 26(a) disclosures based upon the pendency of its Motion to Dismiss. See DE #20 at 1-2. The Parties are advised that, pursuant to Rule 7(b), "[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). With respect to Defendant's objection, Defendant may file an appropriate motion for relief which is in compliance with all applicable Local Rules, including the requirements of a memorandum of law and meaningful conferral with opposing counsel. With respect to the litigation schedule, I decline to extend any deadline based upon the present record. For purposes of any forthcoming motion to extend litigation deadlines, the Parties are advised that 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). In the event that the Parties intend to file a motion to modify the Pretrial Scheduling Order, they are advised that such motion should include specific facts to support the 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. Generalized references to the perceived complexity of the case will not suffice. The Parties are further reminded that at any time, they may consent to the jurisdiction of United States Magistrate Judge William Matthewman, who generally allows litigants great flexibility in setting the course and schedule, including the trial date, of their case. The consent form can be found at Appendix A of the Pretrial Scheduling Order (DE #15 ). Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 9/1/2021. (kal)
|
| Filing 20 Joint SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 26(f) by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto (Osherow, Mark) |
| Filing 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction #1 Complaint, , MOTION to Change Venue by The Tyson Group, Inc.. Responses due by 9/10/2021 (Attachments: #1 Affidavit in Support of Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, Improper Venue, and in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue)(Carreras, Lissette) |
| Filing 18 Amended NOTICE of Mediator Selection. Selected/Added Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto, Howard Tescher as Mediator. (Osherow, Mark) |
| Filing 17 Clerks Notice to Filer re #16 Notice (Other). Parties/Mediator Not Added; ERROR - The Filer failed to add all parties from the complaint/petition/removal, etc. or the mediator. Filer is instructed to file a Notice of Entry of Parties Listed into CM/ECF and add the additional parties/mediator. (jbs) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto re #15 Scheduling Order,, Order Referring Case to Mediation, Notice of Mediator Selection (Osherow, Mark) |
|
Filing 15
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION: (Amended Pleadings due by 9/23/2021., Discovery due by 1/13/2022., Joinder of Parties due by 9/23/2021., In Limine Motions due by 1/27/2022., Pretrial Motions due by 1/27/2022., Joint Pretrial Stipulation due by 2/28/2022.). Signed by Magistrate Judge William Matthewman on 8/16/2021. See attached document for full details. (jas)
|
| Filing 14 Certificate of Other Affiliates/Corporate Disclosure Statement - NONE disclosed by The Tyson Group, Inc. (Carreras, Lissette) |
|
Filing 13
PAPERLESS ORDER granting #12 Motion for Extension of Time. On the day before its Answer was due to be filed, Defendant moved for a two week extension of time. In support, Defendant submits only that counsel "was recently retained" and has not "had an opportunity to adequately investigate the claims." This conclusory assertion does not provide the court with any basis upon which to evaluate whether good cause exists to grant the requested relief. Nonetheless, because the requested extension is brief and unopposed, I will grant Defendant until August 27, 2021 to file a response to the Complaint. No further extensions will be granted absent a showing of good cause which is well-explained and supported by specific facts. Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 8/13/2021. (kal)
|
| Filing 12 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Complaint, by The Tyson Group, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order A - Proposed Order)(Carreras, Lissette) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Lissette M. Carreras on behalf of The Tyson Group, Inc.. Attorney Lissette M. Carreras added to party The Tyson Group, Inc.(pty:dft). (Carreras, Lissette) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Brett Michael Amron on behalf of The Tyson Group, Inc.. Attorney Brett Michael Amron added to party The Tyson Group, Inc.(pty:dft). (Amron, Brett) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER REFERRING CASE AND SETTING TRIAL DATE Referring Case Magistrate Judge William Matthewman for to enter a Scheduling Order. (Jury Trial set for 3/28/2022 09:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks., Calendar Call set for 3/23/2022 01:15 PM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks.) Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 8/11/2021. See attached document for full details. (jbs) #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 8 Clerks Notice to Filer re #6 Summons Returned Executed, No service date was entered. ERROR: The service date was not entered. The correction was made by the Clerk and filing was re-docketed, see 7 Summons Returned Executed,. It is not necessary to refile this document. (jbs) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto. The Tyson Group, Inc. served on 7/23/2021, answer due 8/13/2021. See DE #6 for image. (jbs) |
| Filing 6 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto. All Plaintiffs. (Osherow, Mark) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto re 4 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case Civil Cover Sheet (Osherow, Mark) |
| Filing 4 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. No Civil Cover Sheet. Filer is instructed to file a Notice (Other) with the Civil Cover Sheet attached within 24 hours of the notice. (jbs) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to The Tyson Group, Inc. (jbs) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge William Matthewman 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. (jbs) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against The Tyson Group, Inc. Filing fees $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-14863713, filed by Morris Flancbaum, Susan Rizzuto. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Osherow, Mark) Modified text to correct who the case is against on 8/5/2021 (jua). |
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.
