Rodriguez v. Target Corporation
Plaintiff: Michael D Braun, Jose Rodriguez and Sherri Morris
Defendant: Target Corporation and Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2022cv02982
Filed: April 11, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Lorna G Schofield
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 bw Diversity -Breach of Warranty
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 30, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 55 OPINION AND ORDER re: #43 MOTION to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. filed by Target Corporation. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiffs' claim under the "unlawful" prong of the UCL is dismissed to the extent it rests on alleged underlying violations of the FDCA or its regulations. Plaintiffs' claims for unjust enrichment or quasi-contract are dismissed as duplicative. Plaintiffs' requests for injunctive relief on each of its other claims are dismissed. All of Plaintiffs' other claims survive to the extent Plaintiffs seek damages or other relief for past harm. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket Number 43. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 12/30/2022) (tg)
November 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 54 AMENDED CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: All parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a United States Magistrate Judge, including motions and trial. See 28 U.S.C. 636(c). Fact Discovery due by 4/13/2023. Expert Discovery due by 6/26/2023. This case is to be tried to a jury with respect to all causes of action for which a jury trial is available. Counsel for the parties have conferred and their present best estimate of the length of trial is 10 days. Telephone Conference set for 7/12/2023 at 04:20 PM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield. A party wishing to file a summary judgment or other dispositive motion shall file a pre-motion letter at least two weeks before the conference and in the form provided in the Courts Individual Rule III.A.1. Any party wishing to oppose shall file a responsive letter as provided in the same Individual Rule. The motion will be discussed at the conference. To join the conference, the parties shall call (888) 363-4749 and use Access Code 558-3333. The time of the conference is approximate, but the parties shall be ready to proceed at that time. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the dates under paragraphs 5, 6, 8(a), 9(b)-(c) and 13(a)-(c) into the Court's calendar. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/29/2022) (mml)
November 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 53 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: #52 Letter filed by Jose Rodriguez, Sherri Morris. MEMO ENDORSEMENT: Application GRANTED. An amended civil case management plan and scheduling order will be entered separately. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/29/2022) (mml)
November 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 52 THIRD LETTER addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Michael Braun / Adam Mandelsberg dated 11/28/2022 re: STATUS OF DISCOVERY. Document filed by Sherri Morris, Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
November 18, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 51 ORDER denying without prejudice #50 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Application DENIED without prejudice. Given that the parties are now cooperating and there is no reason to expect a discovery dispute is imminent, the Court will not set another deadline for the parties to file a letter regarding discovery disputes. The parties should continue to confer in good faith in an effort to resolve such disputes before raising them with the Court. The parties' request for a six-month fact discovery extension is excessive and premature in light of the current discovery status. The parties shall continue to work diligently to complete discovery under the current deadlines, and if they are diligent, they may renew their request for a shorter discovery extension to complete whatever tasks remain when the deadline approaches. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/18/2022) (jca)
November 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 50 JOINT LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from The Parties dated November 17, 2022. Document filed by Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc., Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Proposed Amended Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order).(Mandelsberg, Adam)
November 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER with respect to #48 Letter Motion for Discovery. In general, Plaintiffs are correct that Defendant has an obligation to produce responsive, non-privileged documents located after a reasonable and diligent search, and that no set of key words necessarily defines the boundaries of a reasonable and diligent search. Some such documents may be readily located without the use of key word searches and must be produced independent of key word searches. However, such searches may be the only practicable way to locate responsive documents in some very large databases without imposing an undue burden. Given Defendant's superior knowledge of where and with whom responsive documents reside within its system and organization and what key words are likely to identify those documents, the parties shall cooperate to agree on an appropriate list of custodians, locations to be searched and search terms. Those parameters may be informed by initial productions made in an iterative process without placing undue burdens on Defendants. In light of those general principles, the parties are directed to meet and confer further in order to narrow their disputes and to file, by November 18, 2022, a joint letter with each side's portion not to exceed three pages setting forth their respective positions and any supporting authority. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/7/2022) (mml)
November 4, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 48 LETTER MOTION for Discovery addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Plfs' Counsel Kats and Braun dated Nov. 4, 2022. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez. Return Date set for 11/21/2022 at 01:00 PM. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Plfs' Ltr re Discovery Deficiencies, #2 Exhibit Defs' Response Ltr, #3 Exhibit Emails between Parties re Discovery).(Caplan Kats, Maia)
October 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 47 SECOND LETTER addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from The Parties dated October 13, 2022 re: Status of Discovery. Document filed by Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc., Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
September 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 46 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Amended Complaint. Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc. served on 9/8/2022, answer due 9/29/2022. Service was accepted by Nancy Minson. Document filed by Sherri Morris; Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
September 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 45 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Adam Ross Mandelsberg on behalf of Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc...(Mandelsberg, Adam)
September 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 44 JOINDER to join re: #43 MOTION to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. . Document filed by Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc...(Biderman, David)
September 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 43 MOTION to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Biderman, David)
September 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 42 LETTER addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated September 9, 2022 re: Defendant Target Corporation's Renewal of their Motion to Dismiss as to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint and Defendant Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc.'s Intention to Join in Target's Motion, adopting all of the same arguments for dismissal advanced therein. Document filed by Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc., Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc...(pc)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 40 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc., re: #39 Amended Complaint. Document filed by Sherri Morris, Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 39 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT amending #13 Amended Complaint against Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc., Target Corporation with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Sherri Morris, Jose Rodriguez. Related document: #13 Amended Complaint..(Braun, Michael)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER denying as moot #34 Letter Motion for Oral Argument; denying as moot #24 Motion to Dismiss. It is hereby ORDERED that Target's motion to dismiss and motion for oral argument at DENIED as moot. If Target intends to renew its motion to dismiss as to the SAC, Target shall file a notice of motion by September 9, 2022. Target's renewed motion will be decided on the papers already submitted by both sides in support of and opposition to Target's earlier motion. If either side believes that any additional briefing is required in light of the SAC, either side may file a letter, not to exceed three pages, by September 9, 2022. If Lang also moves to dismiss, Lang and Plaintiffs will have a separate opportunity to brief that motion. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motions at Dkt. Nos. 24 and 34. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 9/1/2022) (ate)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order Set/Reset Deadlines: Motions due by 9/9/2022. (ate)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT PLEADING. Notice to Attorney Michael D. Braun to RE-FILE Document No. #36 Amended Complaint,. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the wrong filer/filers were selected for the pleading;. Re-file the pleading using the event type Amended Complaint found under the event list Complaints and Other Initiating Documents - attach the correct signed PDF - select the individually named filer/filers - select the individually named party/parties the pleading is against. (pc)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS. Notice to Attorney Michael D. Braun to RE-FILE Document No. #37 Request for Issuance of Summons. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): The summons requested was not processed due to the deficient pleading. Please file your request for summons when you correct and refile your pleading.;. Re-file the document using the event type Request for Issuance of Summons found under the event list Service of Process - select the correct filer/filers - and attach the correct summons form PDF. (pc)
September 1, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Michael D. Braun. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Sherri Morris, Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc.. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party role was entered incorrectly; party text was omitted;. (pc)
August 31, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 37 FILING ERROR - FILER ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc., re: #36 Amended Complaint. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael) Modified on 9/1/2022 (pc).
August 31, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 36 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT PLEADING - FILER ERROR - SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT amending #13 Amended Complaint against Target Corporation, Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc. with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Jose Rodriguez. Related document: #13 Amended Complaint..(Braun, Michael) Modified on 9/1/2022 (pc).
August 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 35 JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from The Parties dated August 29, 2022 re: Status of Discovery. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
August 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 34 LETTER MOTION for Oral Argument of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated August 26, 2022. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
August 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 33 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: #24 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. . Document filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, #2 Supplement Declaration of David T. Biderman in Support of Supplemental Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, #3 Exhibit A to the Declaration of David T. Biderman).(Mandelsberg, Adam)
August 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 32 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: #24 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. . Document filed by Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
August 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER GRANTING JOINT AGREEMENT OF PARTIES RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION FOR STANDARD LITIGATION: I. PURPOSE. A. This Order will govern discovery of electronically stored information ("ESI") in this case as a supplement to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Section II.A. of this Court's Individual Rules and Procedures for Civil Cases ("Court Rules"), and any other applicable orders and rules. II. COOPERATION. A. The Parties are aware of the importance the Court places on cooperation and commit to cooperate in good faith throughout the matter consistent with Court Rules. III. LIAISON. A. The Parties have identified liaisons to each other who are and will be knowledgeable about and responsible for discussing their respective ESI. Each e-discovery liaison will be, or have access to those who are, knowledgeable about the technical aspects of ediscovery, including the location, nature, accessibility, format, collection, search methodologies, and production of ESI in this matter. The Parties will rely on the liaisons, as needed, to confer about ESI and to help resolve disputes without court intervention. IV. PRESERVATION. A. The Parties have discussed their preservation obligations and needs and agree that preservation of potentially relevant ESI will be reasonable and proportionate pursuant Section II.A.1 of the Court Rules. To reduce the costs and burdens of preservation and to ensure proper ESI is collected and preserved, the Parties agree to the following procedure: B. ESI Disclosures: Within 15 days of the Court's entry of this Order, or as otherwise modified by agreement of the Parties, the Parties agree to exchange the information listed in items (1) through (5). The Parties agree and understand that their respective responses are based on their knowledge and understanding as of the date of the response, and each Party agrees to amend or supplement its responses in a timely manner, throughout the course of discovery, if it learns that in some material respect its response is incomplete or incorrect: 1. A written description of any system for electronic communications and ESI storage (including, but not limited to, custodial locations, shared locations, non-custodial sources, or third-party sources) likely to house potentially relevant data; 2. A written list of all document custodians, including current and former employees, who may have relevant information, including general job titles, dates of employment, and a brief description of job responsibilities for each individual. For each of its custodians, the Producing Party will confirm the custodian is subject to the preservation hold that the Producing Party has implemented in this case; 3. A written description or, at the Producing Party's option, a copy of the Producing Partys operative document retention policies or practices (e.g., retention schedules or policies, auto-delete functions, routine purging, mailbox size limits), throughout the relevant time period, pertaining to any electronic communications and or/ESI storage system(s) that likely house or housed potentially relevant data, including, but not limited to, policies or practices governing the use of corporate as well as personal mobile devices; and 4. A written description of the steps the Producing Party has taken to preserve potentially relevant ESI. 5. An identification of the relevant time period for which the Party anticipates requesting discovery. C. The Parties further agree and understand that if a Producing Party becomes aware that likely relevant ESI, i.e., ESI subject to review and potential production in the matter as agreed upon by the Parties, is (1) lost or destroyed or (2) inaccessible or only of limited accessibility, that Party shall provide a description of the general nature of such information (e.g., financial planning, budget correspondence, marketing, texts, etc.), the circumstances of the loss/destruction, and the cost and burden required to recover or access such information within 15 days of date of awareness. D. The Parties will agree on the number of custodians per Party for whom ESI will be preserved after they exchange of the ESI Disclosures, set forth in Paragraph 1 above. The Parties may add or remove custodians by mutual agreement. The Parties agree that they will not require more than 10 key custodians, pursuant to Court Rule II.A.1, unless permission otherwise is sought from and approved by the Court. E. The Parties agree that backup data files that are maintained in the normal course of business for purposes of disaster recovery, including (but not limited to) backup tapes, disks, SAN, and other forms of media, and that are substantially duplicative of data that are more accessible elsewhere, are not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B), and ESI from these sources will be preserved but will not be searched, reviewed, or produced without a showing of good cause. F. Notwithstanding the foregoing, absent a showing of good cause by the Requesting Party, the Parties are not required to modify the procedures used by them in the ordinary course of business to back-up and archive data; provided, however, that the Parties must preserve all potentially discoverable ESI in their possession, custody, or control, including documents created or received on PDAs (e.g., personal cell phones) that relate to Defendant's business affairs. G. Absent a showing of good cause by the Requesting Party, the Parties are not required to preserve and produce the following categories of ESI: 1. Random access memory (RAM) or other ephemeral data that are difficult to preserve without disabling the operating system. 2. On-line access data (e.g., temporary internet files, history, cache, or cookies). 3. Data that remains from systems no longer in use and that is unintelligible on the systems currently in use, provided such excluded systems are more than five years old. 4. Electronic data (e.g., email, calendars, contact data, and notes) sent to or from a custodian's mobile device for business use (e.g., iPhone, iPad, Android, and Blackberry devices), provided that a copy of all such electronic data is saved elsewhere (such as on a server, laptop, desktop computer, or "cloud" storage). V. SEARCH. A. The Parties agree that in responding to an initial Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 request, or earlier if appropriate, to meet and confer concerning search methodologies, including without limitation, the use of keyword search terms and/or the use of technology assisted review, in order to identify ESI that is subject to production in discovery and filter out ESI that is not subject to discovery. B. The Parties recognize that even though a document may contain one or more of the search terms identified by a Requesting Party in accordance with the procedures listed below, such document may not be responsive to any document request. In such cases, the Producing Party is not required to produce such documents. However, if a document contains one or more of the search terms in accordance with the procedures listed below, and part but not all of the document is responsive to any document, the entire document will be produced and will not be redacted for relevance or responsiveness, except to the extent that it is protected by privilege. C. The Parties recognize that they are obligated to confer with custodians to identify potentially responsive and/or relevant documents and identify potential locations where responsive documents are likely to reside, including whether they might have been generated and/or reside on non-corporate systems. The Parties will ask custodians to specifically identify any responsive documents of which they may be aware, and they will produce any such relevant and responsive, non-privileged documents regardless of whether such documents contain any of the search terms (if the Party uses search terms). D. Document Collection: Each Producing Party will collect documents from custodians agreed to between the Parties or pursuant to Court order. E. ESI Search Methodology: The Parties will discuss and attempt to reach an agreement on search methodologies. Agreement on a search methodology does not relieve a Party of its obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to conduct a reasonable search, confer with relevant witnesses and custodians, and produce all relevant and responsive documents of which it is aware, regardless of whether such documents are also located through the agreed-upon search methodology, and without waiting for an agreement on or implementation of such search methodology. F. The Parties agree that they will meet and confer about methods to search ESI in order to help identify ESI that is subject to production in discovery and filter out ESI that is not subject to discovery. The Parties will aim to establish search methodologies with the goal of locating potentially responsive documents and information, limiting the scope of review for production, minimizing the need for motion practice, and facilitating production in accordance with the deadlines set by the Court or agreed upon by the Parties. G. Search Term Process: 1. If a Producing Party intends to use search terms to filter documents and eliminate collected documents from review, the Producing Party shall first confer in good faith with the Requesting Party to determine the mutually agreeable search terms before using any search terms. If a Producing Party does not intend to use search terms to filter documents and eliminate collected documents from review, the Producing Party shall first confer in good faith with the Requesting Party to advise of the categories of documents for which the Producing Party does not intend to use search terms and the sources of such information. 2. Prior to implementing search terms, the Requesting Party should provide a list of proposed search terms to the Producing Party and the Parties will meet and confer regarding any modifications or additional terms proposed by the Requesting Party. 3. If the Producing Party contends that terms or modifications proposed by the Requesting Party would recall an excessive number of documents or will
August 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 30 PROPOSED STIPULATION AND ORDER. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
July 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 29 STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material... So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 7/27/2022) (vfr)
July 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 28 LETTER addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated July 27, 2022 re: Enclosure of a Stipulated Confidentiality Agreement and Proposed Order. Document filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Stipulated Confidentiality Agreement and Proposed Order).(Mandelsberg, Adam)
July 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 27 CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: All parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a United States Magistrate Judge, including motions and trial. Amended Pleadings may be filed without leave of the Court until 8/31/2022. No additional parties may be join after 8/31/2022. Fact Discovery due by 1/13/2023. Expert Discovery due by 3/17/2023. Pre-Motion Conference set for 4/6/2023 at 04:20 PM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield for any dispositive motions... The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the dates under paragraphs 5, 6, 8(a), 9(b)-(c) and 13(a)-(c) into the Court's calendar. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 7/14/2022) (tro)
July 14, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO COURT REGARDING PROPOSED ORDER. Document No. #26 Proposed Order was reviewed and approved as to form. (km)
July 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 26 PROPOSED ORDER. Document filed by Target Corporation. Related Document Number: #24 ..(Biderman, David) Proposed Order to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.
July 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 25 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: #24 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. . Document filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Supplement - Request for Judicial Notice, #2 Affidavit - Declaration of David T. Biderman in Support of the Request for Judicial Notice, #3 Exhibit - Exhibits A-C to the Declaration of David T. Biderman).(Biderman, David)
July 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 24 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Biderman, David)
July 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Lorna G. Schofield: Initial Pretrial Conference held on 7/13/2022. (jcs)
July 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER granting #20 Motion for Carrie Akinaka to Appear Pro Hac Vice (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Lorna G. Schofield)(Text Only Order) (jcs)
July 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER granting #19 Motion for David T. Biderman to Appear Pro Hac Vice (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Lorna G. Schofield)(Text Only Order) (jcs)
July 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 21 JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Michael D. Braun / Adam R. Mandelsberg dated July 6, 2022 re: Initial Status Conference Statement. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Civil Case Management Plan).(Braun, Michael)
July 6, 2022 Opinion or Order >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. #20 MOTION for Carrie Akinaka to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-26369625. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (sgz)
July 6, 2022 Opinion or Order >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. #19 MOTION for David T. Biderman to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-26368960. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (sgz)
July 5, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 20 MOTION for Carrie Akinaka to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-26369625. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit - Declaration of Carrie Akinaka in Support, #2 Exhibit - Certificate of Good Standing, #3 Text of Proposed Order - Proposed Order).(Akinaka, Carrie)
July 5, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 19 MOTION for David T. Biderman to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-26368960. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit - Declaration of David Biderman in Support, #2 Exhibit - Certificate of Good Standing, #3 Text of Proposed Order - Proposed Order).(Biderman, David)
June 30, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 18 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Maia Caplan Kats on behalf of Sherri Morris, Jose Rodriguez..(Caplan Kats, Maia)
June 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER granting #16 Letter Motion for Conference re: #16 LETTER MOTION for Conference / Pre-Motion Letter addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated June 27, 2022. Application GRANTED. Target shall file its motion to dismiss by July 13, 2022. Plaintiffs shall file their opposition by August 12, 2022. Target shall file its reply by August 26, 2022. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/28/2022) (ate)
June 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Set/Reset Deadlines: Motions due by 7/13/2022. Responses due by 8/12/2022. Replies due by 8/26/2022. (ate)
June 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 16 LETTER MOTION for Conference / Pre-Motion Letter addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated June 27, 2022. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
June 21, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER denying #14 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. Application DENIED. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/21/2022) (vfr)
June 21, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 14 SECOND LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated June 21, 2022. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
June 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 13 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT amending #1 Complaint against Target Corporation with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Jose Rodriguez, Sherri Morris. Related document: #1 Complaint..(Braun, Michael)
June 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER granting #11 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. Application GRANTED. The initial pretrial conference scheduled for June 22, 2022, is adjourned to July 13, 2022, at 4:20 P.M. Theparties shall call 888-363-4749 and use the access code 558-3333. The parties shall file the joint letter and proposed civil case management plan and scheduling order required by the Order at Dkt. No. 6 by July 6, 2022, at 12:00 P.M. If Defendant does not consent in writing to the filing of an amended complaint and Plaintiff intends to seek leave of the court, Plaintiff shall file a letter to that effect by June 9, 2022, attaching a proposed amended complaint, marked to show changes from the current complaint. So Ordered. Initial Conference set for 7/13/2022 at 04:20 PM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/3/2022) (vfr)
June 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated June 3, 2022. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
May 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 NOTICE of Proof of Service re: #6 Order for Initial Pretrial Conference,,,. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
May 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER granting #8 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application GRANTED. Plaintiff shall answer, move or otherwise respond to the Complaint by June 17, 2022. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 5/13/2022) (va)
May 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Set/Reset Deadlines: Target Corporation answer due 6/17/2022. (va)
May 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File a Response to the Complaint addressed to Judge Lorna G. Schofield from Adam R. Mandelsberg dated May 12, 2022. Document filed by Target Corporation..(Mandelsberg, Adam)
May 4, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Complaint. Target Corporation served on 4/26/2022, answer due 5/17/2022. Service was accepted by Briana - CT Corp. Intake Specialist. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
April 20, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER: This case has been assigned to me for all purposes. It is hereby ORDERED that a telephonic conference will be held on June 22, 2022 at 4:20 p.m. The parties shall call (888) 363-4749 and enter the access code 558-3333. The telephonic conference is public, and the time of the conference is approximate, but the parties shall be ready to proceed by that time. All pretrial conferences must be attended by the attorney who will serve as principal trial counsel. The parties shall ensure they are all dialed into the conference call by the appointed conference time, as further set forth herein. Initial Conference set for 6/22/2022 at 04:20 PM before Judge Lorna G. Schofield. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 4/20/2022) (mml)
April 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Target Corporation..(lal)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Target Corporation, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Jose Rodriguez..(Braun, Michael)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Braun, Michael)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to Attorney Michael Braun. Attorney must electronically file the Civil Cover Sheet. Use the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents. (gp)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Michael Braun. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: party name contained a typographical error. (gp)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Lorna G. Schofield. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(gp)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (gp)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Case Designated ECF. (gp)
April 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 FILING ERROR - DUPLICATE DOCKET ENTRY - COMPLAINT against Target Corporation. Document filed by Michael D Braun. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet).(Braun, Michael) Modified on 4/13/2022 (gp).
April 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Target Corporation. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-25999633)Document filed by Michael D Braun..(Braun, Michael)
April 12, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to Attorney Michael D. Braun. Attorney must electronically file the Civil Cover Sheet. Use the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents. (pc)
April 12, 2022 Opinion or Order ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY TO FILE CIVIL INITIAL PLEADING. Notice to Attorney Michael D. Braun to electronically file the initial pleading in this case. Failure to file the initial pleading may result in the dismissal of the case pursuant to Amended Standing Order 15-mc-00131. Initial Pleading due by 4/18/2022. (pc)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rodriguez v. Target Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael D Braun
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jose Rodriguez
Represented By: Michael D. Braun
Represented By: Maia Caplan Kats
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sherri Morris
Represented By: Maia Caplan Kats
Represented By: Michael D. Braun
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Target Corporation
Represented By: Adam Ross Mandelsberg
Represented By: Carrie Akinaka
Represented By: David Biderman
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Lang Pharma Nutrition, Inc.
Represented By: Adam Ross Mandelsberg
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 [ Unicourt | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?