Robinson v. Carport Sales & Leasing, Inc.

Filing 16

ORDER denying without prejudice 12 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying as moot 14 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply; granting 15 Motion file an amended motion to dismiss and response to same. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith on 11/25/2014. (Smith, Thomas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
MELISSA ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 6:14-cv-1358-Orl-40TBS

MARQUES ENTERPRISES, INC., a/k/a
CARPORT SALES & LEASING, INC.,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/
ORDER
This case comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to
File Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14), and the parties’ Joint
Stipulation Regarding Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiff’s Response Thereto
(Doc. 15).
Plaintiff has sued Defendant for violating the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. §
1601 et seq., and Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. Part 226. (Doc. 1). Defendant has filed a
motion to dismiss in which it argues that it made all required disclosures and correctly
calculated the amount financed. (Doc. 12).
Because he was on a prepaid, non-refundable family vacation through
November 24, 2014, Plaintiff’s lawyer requested an extension of time to December 8
to file a response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Id.). Counsel for Defendant did
not consent to the relief sought. (Id.). Defendant’s unwillingness to consent to
Plaintiff’s motion for a brief extension of time caused (and still causes) the Court
concern. The Court has been awaiting Defendant’s written response to the motion for

extension of time so that it can understand the denial of what would appear to be a
simple professional courtesy.
Yesterday, the parties filed their joint stipulation in which they agree that
Defendant may have through December 5, 2014 within to file an amended motion to
dismiss and then Plaintiff will have 14 days to respond. Upon due consideration, the
parties’ joint stipulation is construed as a motion and GRANTED. Accordingly:
(1) Defendant Marques Enterprises, Inc. a/k/a Carport Sales & Leasing’s
Dispositive Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 12) is DENIED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
(2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14), is DENIED AS MOOT;
(3) Defendant has through December 5, 2014 to file its amended motion to
dismiss Plaintiff’s amended complaint; and
(4) Plaintiff shall have 14 days from the filing of the amended motion to dismiss
within to file its response to the motion.
DONE AND ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on November 25, 2014.

Copies to all Counsel

-2-