Gomez v. Komie, Esq. et al
| Felipe N. Gomez |
| Stephen Komie, Esq., Komie and Associates, Feldman Wasser, Randy Cox, Esq. and Tamara Tanzillo, Esq. |
| 1:2022cv00739 |
| February 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Matthew F Kennelly |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 3, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 RESPONSE by Plaintiff Felipe N. Gomez to RTSC. (jn, ) |
| Filing 14 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: The Court entered an order on 3/31/2022 directing plaintiff to show cause in writing by 4/14/2022 why his complaint should not be dismissed for various reasons. Plaintiff made a filing on 3/31/2022 - a "status report," as plaintiff entitled it, stating that he intended to move for leave to amend his complaint. This motion included the following text - "Gomez reports a motion for additional time, appending proof of the foregoing, until the first week of May 2022...." Plaintiff did not, however, formally seek an extension of the show-cause deadline - though that may he what intended by his "report[ ]." Then on 4/15/2022, plaintiff asked for leave to file a late response, stating that he intends to pay the filing fee for this case and again indicating that he intends to amend his complaint. That, however, does not address the Court's show-cause order, at least not directly. Pulling all of this together, the Court orders as follows: (1) The deadline for plaintiff to respond to the Court's show-cause order of 3/31/2022 is extended to 5/2/2022, but it will not be extended again. (2) Plaintiff may attempt to meet his obligations under the show-cause order by filing a proposed amended complaint, but if he takes that route he must understand that if the Court does not agree that the proposed amended complaint states a claim, it may dismiss the case on that basis. (3) Payment of the filing fee will not get plaintiff around the show-cause order, as the Court would have entered the same order at its own instance even if plaintiff had not initially sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (mk) |
| Filing 13 MOTION by Plaintiff Felipe N. Gomez for leave to late - respond to RTSC #11 , response informing Gomez will pay the fee, and informing Gomez will exercise FRCP 15(a) Amendment as a matter of course to address court concerns re sufficiency of complaint (Attachment) (kl, ) |
| Filing 12 DEFENDANT GOMEZ STATUS Report on motion to amend and timeline by Felipe N. Gomez (kl, ) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: This case has been reassigned to Judge Kennelly. Plaintiff's motion for recusal of the previously assigned judge is denied as moot #8 . Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted #3 . The Court has reviewed plaintiff's complaint under 28 USC 1915(e)(2) to determine whether it states a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff asserts a claim under the civil liability provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Plaintiff is ordered to show cause in writing by 4/14/2022 why the complaint should not be dismissed due to what appears to be plaintiff's failure to allege the requirements of a civil RICO claim including: the existence of an "enterprise" as defined in RICO and governing caselaw; the defendants' participation in the alleged enterprise; and a "pattern" of racketeering activity as defined in RICO and governing caselaw. If plaintiff does not respond to the order to show cause by 4/14/2022 the Court will consider the sufficiency of his complaint without the benefit of his views. Mailed notice. (mma, ) |
| Filing 10 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: Case reassigned to the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly for all further proceedings pursuant to IOP 13(d). Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr no longer assigned to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on 3/23/2022. (kl, ) |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr: Plaintiff's motion for recusal #8 is taken under advisement. The Court will issue a ruling by mail. In the meantime, all matters relating to this litigation are stayed. Emailed notice (cdh, ) |
| Filing 8 MOTION by Plaintiff Felipe N. Gomez 28 USC 455 motion for recusal of His Honor Dow, Instanter (Attachments) (kl, ) Modified on 3/18/2022 (kl, ). |
| Filing 7 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: Case reassigned to the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr for all further proceedings pursuant to IOP 13(f). Honorable Edmond E. Chang no longer assigned to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on 2/28/2022. (kl, ) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of the motion #5 to recuse, out of an abundance of caution, the motion is granted under 28 U.S.C. 455(a). The underlying facts of this lawsuit are not themselves a basis for recusal. Instead, Plaintiff Felipe Gomez has been suspended from the practice of law on an interim and indefinite basis, and it appears that in part the grounds for the Petition for Interim Suspension was alleged misconduct by Gomez in a case presided over by Judge Chang. See Commission No. 2020-PR-00064, Petition for Interim Suspension at paras. 10-18 (referring to Case No. 18-CV-04818 and findings of the Court); In re Felipe N. Gomez, S. Ct. Order of 04/08/2021 (imposing interim suspension). The Hearing Board recently recommended a three-year suspension. See Commission No. 2020-PR-00064, Report and Recommendation of the Hearing Board (01/07/2022). Accordingly, the motion to recuse is granted and the case will be reassigned by random lot. Emailed notice (mw, ) |
| Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff Felipe N. Gomez 28 USC 455 for recusal of His Honor Chang, Instanter. (Attachments) (daj, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (kl, ) |
| Filing 4 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Felipe N. Gomez (kl, ) |
| Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Felipe N. Gomez for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (kl, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (kl, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and no copies by Felipe N. Gomez (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Fraudulent "Lien", #2 Exhibit "Lien")(kl, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. Case assignment: Random assignment. (kl, ) |
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 Illinois Northern 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.
