Doc. 116

Document Sample
Doc. 116 Powered By Docstoc
					Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2012 Page 1 of 5



                         IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
                             THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                           CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON

  TRAIAN BUJDUVEANU,

          Plaintiff,
  vs.

  DISMAS CHARITIES, INC., ANA GISPERT,
  DEREK THOMAS and ADAMS LESHOTA

        Defendants.
  _________________________________________/

                            DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE
                         PLAINTIFF’S DOCKET ENTRIES 114 AND 115

          Defendants Dismas Charities, Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas and Lashanda Adams,

  (collectively “Defendants”) by and through their undersigned counsel, file their Motion to Strike

  Plaintiff Traian Bujduveanu’s (“Plaintiff”) Reply Brief (DE #114) and Plaintiff’s Supplemental

  Motion for Summary Judgment (DE #115) as follows:

                                      PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

          1.      On December 10, 2011, Defendants filed their Motion for Summary Judgment

  against the Plaintiff. (DE #83)

          2.      On January 3, 2012, Plaintiff filed his Response. (DE #90)

          3.      On January 12, 2012, Defendants filed their Reply Brief. (DE #91)

          4.      On January 18, 2012, Plaintiff filed another brief (DE #92), titled “Reply Brief in

  Response to Defendants’ Response Brief,” which in content and filing designation given by

  Plaintiff shows it to be a sur-reply.
Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2012 Page 2 of 5



           5.       On March 15, 2012, Judge Seitz issued an Order (DE #98) which stated in

  relevant part:

                 Based on the allegations of the amended pleading, the parties shall file
                 supplements to their existing motions for summary judgment by April 11, 2012
                 to address any new issues. No additional discovery will be permitted. (Emphasis
                 supplied)

           6.       Defendants then timely filed their Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment

  (DE #103).

           7.       On May 21, 2012, Magistrate Simonton granted Plaintiff an extension to respond

  to Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment. (DE #108).

           8.       Plaintiff filed his Response within the extension period on July 3, 2012. (DE

  #111).

           9.       Defendants timely filed their Reply on July 12, 2012.           (DE #113), which

  concluded briefing under the Local and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

           10.      Plaintiff, however, has filed two additional briefs, Docket Entries 114 and 115.

           11.      As the Plaintiff is not permitted to file a response brief to a reply brief by Local

  Rules 7.1 and 7.5 of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Defendants

  move this Court to strike them from the record.

                                          LEGAL ARGUMENT

            The Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

  provide the procedure for Motion practice. Rule 7.1(c) provides that the movant shall file a

  motion, the party opposing the motion shall file a response brief and the movant may file a reply

  brief. In the matter at hand, Defendants timely and properly filed a Supplemental Motion for




                                                     2
Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2012 Page 3 of 5



  Summary Judgment pursuant to the Court’s Order (DE #98), the Plaintiff filed a response brief

  and the Defendants filed a reply brief.

         In contravention of the Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules, Plaintiff improperly

  filed a Response brief to Defendants’ Reply Brief (DE #114) and a Supplemental Motion in

  response (DE #115). These briefs do not raise any new issues for this Court to consider.

  Instead, these additional briefs appear simply to be an attempt by Plaintiff to further burden the

  Court and counsel with repetitive and irrelevant arguments with the apparent purpose to further

  delay an ultimate ruling on summary judgment, which has been pending since January 12, 2012.



                                            CONCLUSION

         For the reasons set forth above, the Defendants would move this Court for an Order

  Striking Plaintiffs Response Brief to a Reply Brief (DE #114) and Supplemental Response Brief

  (DE #115), and for any further relief the Court deems just and proper.

                                               Respectfully submitted,

                                               EISINGER, BROWN, LEWIS, FRANKEL,
                                               & CHAIET, P.A.
                                               Attorneys for Defendants
                                               4000 Hollywood Boulevard
                                               Suite 265-South
                                               Hollywood, FL 33021
                                               (954) 894-8000
                                               (954) 894-8015 Fax

                                               BY:    /S/ David S. Chaiet____________
                                                      DAVID S. CHAIET, ESQUIRE
                                                      FBN: 963798




                                                  3
Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2012 Page 4 of 5




                                 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

         I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 14th day of August, 2012, I electronically filed the
  foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing
  document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified on the
  attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic
  Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties
  who are authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

                               __/s/ David S. Chaiet_______________
                               DAVID S. CHAIET, ESQUIRE
                               Florida Bar No. 963798




                                                4
Case 1:11-cv-20120-AMS Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2012 Page 5 of 5




                                     SERVICE LIST

                   Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities, Inc., et al.
                      Case No..: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
                 United States District Court, Southern District of Florida


  Traian Bujduveanu
  Pro Se Plaintiff
  5601 W. Broward Blvd.
  Plantation, FL 33317

  Tel: (954) 316-3828
  Email: orionav@msn.com




                                             5

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: United States District Court,Southern District of Florida,Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities,Ana Gispert,Derek Thomas, Lashanda Adams