Gray v. Talk Fusion, Inc. et al

Filing 72

ORDER denying without prejudice 61 motion to compel arbitration; denying without prejudice 62 motion to compel arbitration; denying 69 motion to dismiss. See order for details. Signed by Judge Mary S. Scriven on 4/25/2017. (KM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

DENNIS GRAY,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 8:16-cv-2360-T-35JSS

TALK FUSION, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss for Lack of Case or Controversy (Dkt. 69), to which Plaintiff has responded in
opposition (Dkt. 71).
Plaintiff Dennis Gray filed this putative class action against Talk Fusion, Inc. and
related entities for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
and state-law consumer statutes, based on Defendants’ alleged operation of an illegal
pyramid scheme.

(Dkt. 3)

On September 13, 2016, Defendants moved to compel

arbitration of Plaintiff’s claims. (Dkts. 61, 62). Before the Court ruled on the motions to
compel, Defendants filed the instant motion to dismiss, which asserts that the claims of
named Plaintiff, Dennis Gray, are moot because he voluntarily rejoined Talk Fusion and
is again selling Talk Fusion products. (Dkt. 69 at 2). In response, Plaintiff’s putative
class counsel does not dispute that the individual claims of Plaintiff Dennis Gray are moot,
but he requests leave to amend the complaint, in order to substitute a different named
class representative. (Dkt. 71)

Upon consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that:
(1)

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Case or Controversy (Dkt. 69)

is DENIED, and Plaintiff’s request to amend is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s counsel may file a
Second Amended Complaint within sixty 60 days of the date of this Order. Until a
Second Amended Complaint is filed, this action is STAYED. If counsel fails to secure
another named Plaintiff for this putative class action within the time frame allotted, this
action will dismissed without prejudice.
(2)

Defendants’ Motions to Compel Arbitration (Dkts. 61 and 62) are DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 25th day of April, 2017.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record

2