Matos-Cruz v. JetBlue Airways Corporation et al

Filing 22

ORDER denying as moot 20 motion to dismiss and Motion for More Definite Statement. The portion of the Court's August 1 Order directing Plaintiff to show cause whether it had served JetBlue and, if so, why it had not yet moved for the entry of Clerk's default (Doc. 18, p. 3, 3) is DISCHARGED. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 8/3/2017. (VMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
FILOMENA MATOS-CRUZ,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 6:17-cv-380-Orl-37TBS

JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION;
ABM AVIATION, INC.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________
ORDER
On June 26, 2016, Defendant ABM Aviation, Inc. moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s initial
complaint. (Doc. 12 (“ABM’s MTD”).) The Court later granted ABM’s MTD as
unopposed due to Plaintiff’s failure to respond. (Doc. 18 (“August 1 Order”).) The
August 1 Order also noted that Defendant JetBlue Airways Corporation (“JetBlue”) had
not yet appeared in this action and directed Plaintiff to indicate: (1) whether she had
served Jet Blue; and (2) if so, why she had not yet moved for the entry of Clerk’s default
(“Show Cause Directive”). (Id. at 3.)
Recognizing the implications of the Show Cause Directive, JetBlue suddenly
appeared and moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint based on the same grievances
espoused in ABM’s MTD. (See Doc. 20 (“JetBlue’s MTD”).) But there is no operative
complaint remaining in this action to dismiss; 1 thus, JetBlue’s MTD is due to be denied as

1

p. 3.)

Plaintiff was given until August 9, 2017, to file an amended complaint. (Doc. 18,
-1-

moot. Notwithstanding JetBlue’s dilatory response, as it has now appeared and indicated
its intent to defend this action, the Court will discharge its Show Cause Order.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1.

Defendant JetBlue Airways Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the
Alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. 20) is DENIED AS
MOOT.

2.

The portion of the Court’s August 1 Order directing Plaintiff to show cause
whether it had served JetBlue and, if so, why it had not yet moved for the
entry of Clerk’s default (Doc. 18, p. 3, ¶ 3) is DISCHARGED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on August 3, 2017.

Copies to:
Counsel of Record

-2-