Mergenthaler et al v. Barnard et al
| Ruediger Albrecht, Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler and Marc Truong |
| United States Trustee and R. Kenneth Barnard |
| rosemary Mergenthaler |
| 2:2019cv04279 |
| July 24, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Joanna Seybert |
| Bankruptcy Appeal (801) |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1334 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 20, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| First Supplemental Electronic Index to Record on Appeal sent to US Court of Appeals. #15 Amended Notice of Appeal; Documents are available via Pacer. For docket entries without a hyperlink or for documents under seal, contact the court and we'll arrange for the document(s) to be made available to you. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 15 AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL as to Order on Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis and Order on Motion for Reconsideration; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER & CLERK'S JUDGMENT by Ruediger Albrecht, Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler and Marc Truong. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 14 CERTIFIED ORDER of USCA 19-2562 as to #12 Notice of Appeal, filed by Ruediger Albrecht, Marc Truong and Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler. On August 20, 2019, the Court issued a notice pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4), staying this appeal due to a pending motion in the district court. The district court having denied the motion in an order dated September 13, 2019, IT IS ORDERED that the stay of this appeal is hereby lifted. Appellants are directed to comply with the notices of defective filing issued on September 10, 2019. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 13 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Electronic Order of the Court Via Electronic Mail and/or First-Class Mail served on Ruediger Albrecht, Mac Truong and Rosemary Mergenthaler, with courtesy copies to Office of the US Trustee and R. Kenneth Barnard, as Trustee on 9/13/2019, filed by R. Kenneth Barnard. (Attachments: #1 Electronic Order of the Court) (Blansky, David) |
ELECTRONIC ORDER granting #4 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; granting #5 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; granting #6 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; denying #11 Motion for Reconsideration.Upon review of the declarations in support of the applications to proceed in forma pauperis (D.E. 4, 5, 6), the Court finds that Appellants are qualified to commence these actions without prepayment of the filing fees. Therefore, the requests to proceed in forma pauperis are GRANTED.However, Appellants' joint motion for reconsideration (D.E. 11) of this Court's July 31, 2019 Memorandum and Order dismissing their bankruptcy appeal (D.E. 2) is DENIED. As Appellants have already been instructed, "[m]otions for reconsideration may be brought pursuant to Rules 59(e) and 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 6.3. A motion for reconsideration is appropriate when the moving party believes the Court overlooked important matters or controlling decisions that would have influenced the prior decision. Reconsideration is not a proper tool to repackage and relitigate arguments and issues already considered by the Court in deciding the original motion. Nor is it proper to raise new arguments and issues. Reconsideration may only be granted when the Court did not evaluate decisions or data that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion reached by the Court." In re Mergenthaler, No. 15-CV-2034, 2016 WL 5956009, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2016) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). The Court notes that, yet again, Appellants did not seek the requisite permission to file this motion. See generally Mem. & Order, D.E. 2 (outlining filing injunctions imposed by this Court, Judge Grossman, and Chief Judge Irizarry). It is thus procedurally barred. Notwithstanding Appellants' persistent failure to comply with court orders and continued vexatious and frivolous filings, the Court has reviewed the motion for reconsideration. Appellants' assertions that the Trustee's final report is "fake" and that this Court overlooked Judge Grossman's "felonies of conspiracy" and other crimes are not only a repackaging of their prior arguments both here and before the Bankruptcy court, but are completely devoid of factual and legal support and meritless. Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Appellants are WARNED that further attempts to evade court orders will not be tolerated. It is now ORDERED that: (1) Appellants are ENJOINED from filing any additional complaints, motions, or appeals in this Court concerning the assets in Mergenthaler's bankruptcy estate without first seeking leave of Court; (2) the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to return to Appellants, without filing, any new complaint, motion, or appeal concerning the assets in Mergenthaler's bankruptcy estate if they are received without a separate application seeking leave to file; (3) if Appellants seek leave to file a new complaint or appeal and the Court finds that it is is not subject to this filing injunction, the Court shall grant Appellants leave to file the new complaint or appeal and it shall be assigned a civil docket number; and (4) if leave to file is denied, Appellants' submissions shall be filed on the Court's miscellaneous docket and a summary order denying leave to file shall be entered and no further action shall be taken.Appellants are WARNED that the continued submission of frivolous civil actions may result in the imposition of additional sanctions, including monetary penalties, upon notice and an opportunity to be heard. 28 U.S.C. 1651(a); Malley v. Corp. Counsel of the City of N.Y., 9 F. App'x 58, 59 (2d Cir. 2001) (affirming imposition of $1,500 sanction on pro se litigant for filing repetitive, frivolous complaints). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order to the pro se Appellants. The Clerk is further directed to provide a copy to the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York. Given Appellants' pro se status, the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Electronic Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is DENIED for purposes of an appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45, 82 S. Ct. 917, 8 L. Ed. 2d 21 (1962). Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 9/13/2019. (Alessi, Samantha)
|
| APPEAL FILING FEE DUE re #12 Notice of Appeal; Payment in the amount of $505.00, can be made in person to the clerks office or mailed in. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Electronic Index to Record on Appeal sent to US Court of Appeals. #12 Notice of Appeal; Documents are available via Pacer. For docket entries without a hyperlink or for documents under seal, contact the court and we'll arrange for the document(s) to be made available to you. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to #2 Memorandum & Opinion and #3 Clerk's Judgment, by Ruediger Albrecht, Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler, Marc Truong. IFP has been denied for Appeal. Filing Fee due for Appeal. (Attachments: #1 IFP Attachment #1, #2 IFP Attachment #2, #3 IFP Attachment #3) (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 11 Joint MOTION for Reconsideration re #2 Memorandum & Opinion,,, Email,, by Ruediger Albrecht, Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler, Marc Truong. (Bollbach, Jean) |
| Filing 10 Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Mail sent to Rosemary Mergenthaler - jgm dtd 7/31/19 returned unable to forward (Bollbach, Jean) |
| Filing 9 Mail Returned as Undeliverable Re: #2 Memorandum & Order; Mail sent to Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler received in Clerk's Office marked Return to Sender; Not Deliverable as Addressed; Unable to Forward. (Valle, Christine) |
| Filing 8 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Memorandum & Order dated July 31, 2019, Dkt. No. 2 via First Class Mail and/or Electronic Mail served on Ruediger Albrecht, Mac Truong and Rosemary Mergenthaler, with courtesy copies to Office of the US Trustee and R. Kenneth Barnard, as Trustee on August 5, 2019, filed by R. Kenneth Barnard. (Blansky, David) |
| Filing 7 Mail Returned as Undeliverable; Copy of Docket Sheet sent to Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler marked Return to Sender; Not Deliverable as Addressed; Unable to Forward. (Valle, Christine) |
| Filing 3 CLERK'S JUDGMENT ( U.S. Bankruptcy Court-ENY, 8-15-72040-reg): ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Appellants Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler. Marc Truong and Ruediger Albrecht take nothing of Appellees R. Kenneth Barnard and United States Trustee; that the appeal is dismissed in its entirety with prejudice; that in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of any appeal; and that this case is closed. Ordered by Clerk of Court on 7/31/2019 (CM to pro se appellants with an appeal packet). (Toritto, Jim) |
|
Filing 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in its entirety. Given Appellants' pro se status, the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is DENIED for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Appellants and mark this case CLOSED. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 7/31/2019. C/M; C/ECF (Valle, Christine)
|
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis by Ruediger Albrecht. (Valle, Christine) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis by Marc Truong. (Valle, Christine) |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis by Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler. (Valle, Christine) |
| Filing 1 Notice of APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY COURT. Bankruptcy Court case number 8-15-72040-reg., filed by Ruediger Albrecht, Marc Truong, Rosemary Ida Mergenthaler. (Attachments: #1 USBC Doc #352 Main Document-Pages 1-120, #2 USBC Doc #352 Main Document-Pages 121-240, #3 USBC Doc #352 Main Document-Pages 241-270, #4 USBC Doc #352 Main Document-Pages 271-300, #5 USBC Doc #352 Main Document-Pages 301-352, #6 USBC Doc #352 Notice of Recipients, #7 USBC Doc #352 Transmital of Notice of Appeal, #8 USBC Doc #352 Notice of Recipients as to Transmital) (Corsini, Alexander) |
| Notice that appeal from the Bankruptcy Court has been docketed. Parties shall file with the Bankruptcy Clerk their designations of items to be included in the record and statement of issues to be presented pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8009. (Corsini, Alexander) |
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 New York Eastern 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.
