J&J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Neyow's Creole Cafe, LLC et al, No. 2:2014cv01332 - Document 43 (E.D. La. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER and REASONS - IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' "Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP12(b)(6)" 37 is DENIED for essentially the same reasons set forth in Plaintiff's opposition memorandum (Rec. Doc. 41). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED t hat Plaintiff's motion for default 31 and second motion to strike 40 are DENIED, and Defendants' motions for extensions of time to file (Rec. Docs. 35 and 36) are MOOT, as stated within document. Signed by Chief Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt on 5/16/2016. (cbs)

Download PDF
J&J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Neyow's Creole Cafe, LLC et al Doc. 43 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA J&J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC. CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 14-1332 NEYOW'S CREOLE CAFE, LLC, TANYA PETERS DUBUCLET, and TANA MONTREL SECTION "N" (5) ORDER AND REASONS A number of motions are presently pending in the above-captioned matter. The Court rules on them as stated herein. IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' "Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP12(b)(6)" (Rec. Doc. 37) is DENIED for essentially the same reasons set forth in Plaintiff's opposition memorandum (Rec. Doc. 41). Additional information regarding the factual bases of Plaintiff's claims can be obtained by Defendants through discovery, whereas any valid pre-trial defenses can be asserted by means of properly submitted and supported Rule 56 motion practice. In an abundance of caution, given Defendants' eventual filing of the instant motion to dismiss (Rec. Doc. 37), IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for default (Rec. Doc. 31) and second motion to strike (Rec. Doc. 40) are DENIED, and Defendants' motions for extensions of time to file (Rec. Docs. 35 and 36) are MOOT. Nevertheless, although the Court has declined to grant Plaintiff's most recent motions, defense counsel's repeated submission of erroneous, contradictory, duplicative, and/or incomplete documents in this matter has not gone Dockets.Justia.com unnoticed by the Court. The same is true of defense counsel's seeming disregard of the Court's deadlines. See Rec. Docs. 12-16, 18-19, 22, 23-25, 29-30, and 33-36. Given the foregoing, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defense counsel, George Martin Gates, IV, show cause in writing, on or before Wednesday, May 25, 2016, at 5:00 p.m, why he should not be required, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง1927, to pay Plaintiff's reasonable attorney's fees and costs expended in preparation of its most recent motion for default (Rec. Doc. 31) and second motion to strike (Rec. Doc. 40). IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that any documents hereinafter filed in this proceeding by defense counsel, on behalf of Defendants, must be accompanied by a certification by counsel of record that he has (1) thoroughly familiarized himself with the Court's record in this matter and (2) personally reviewed all of the document(s) being filed to confirm their accuracy and compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court. Finally, any questions regarding the mechanics of filing in the CM/ECF system and/or deficiency notices issues by the Clerk of Court are to promptly be addressed the CM/ECF Help Desk at 504-589-7788, CM/ECF Technical Support at 504-589-7773, and/or Case Manager Cherie Stouder at 504-589-7683. New Orleans, Louisiana, this 16th day of May 2016. _____________________________________ KURT D. ENGELHARDT United States District Judge 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.