Blaszkowski et al v. Mars Inc. et al

Filing 104

RESPONSE in Opposition re 103 MOTION to Continue Scheduling Hearing filed by Renee Blaszkowski. (MacIvor, Catherine)

Blaszkowski et al v. Mars Inc. et al

Doc. 104

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case no. 07-21221-CIV-ALTONAGA-TURNOFF RENEE BLASZKOWSKI, et al., Plaintiffs vs. MARS, INC., et al., Defendants. ________________________________/ PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO CERTAIN DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF SCHEDULING HEARING Plaintiffs, Renee Blaszkowski et al., respectfully request this Court to deny Defendants, Mars, Incorporated, Procter and Gamble Co., Colgate-Palmolive Co., Del Monte Foods Co., Nestle USA, Inc., Nutro Products, Inc., PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motion ("Defendants") to Continue Scheduling Hearing and states: This Court originally ordered the parties' to provide the Court with a Joint Scheduling Report by June 7, 2007. [DE 7]. Based on some of the Defendants' Motions for Extension of Time for thirty (30) days to comply with the Court's Scheduling Order, allowed the additional time and scheduled a hearing on July 6, 2006. [DE 57]. Some of the Defendants have again requested an extension of time to comply with the Order based upon two grounds: local counsel for Defendant Nutro has a scheduling conflict and some of the Defendants believe that the Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint will "affect decisions about scheduling dates." [DE 103].

1
Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 2 of 8

The Plaintiffs/Classs Representative request that the Motion be denied for all of the following reasons: 1 None of the Defendants' counsel raised scheduling conflicts at the time that the

Order was entered on June 7, 2006. While the Defendants Motiondid not state that this was a pre-existing court appearance that could not otherwise be scheduled given the late timing of the Motion, presumably Nutro's local counsel can make arrangements for another lawyer in local counsel's firm to attend a scheduling conference so that it does not have to be postponed and the Scheduling Order delayed again. 2. Plaintiff/Class Representative, Renee Blaszkowski, a resident of Michigan, has

made arrangements to attend this hearing as a representative for the Plaintiffs. It would cause her great inconvenience if this hearing were to be continued at this late date. 3. The Defendants have been aware for several weeks that the undersigned planned

to be on vacation during that week, but because the Plaintiffs want to move the case along, the undersigned has made arrangements to be at the hearing notwithstanding vacation plans. If there was a valid conflict which would necessitate the continuance of this hearing based upon one individual's unavailability, the undersigned presumes that it could have, and should have, been brought to the Plaintiff's counsel's attention well before now. 4. The Plaintiffs' counsel and the Defendants have been consulting about a proposed The Plaintiffs' counsel and

Joint Scheduling Report twice over the last three (3) weeks.

representatives of the Defendants discussed the scheduling tracks and discovery twice and appeared to come to certain verbal agreements and noted certain differences several weeks ago during the initial telephone conference. A one and a half page draft Joint Scheduling Report has been created and was sent to the undersigned by certain of the Defendants on Thursday June 28,

2

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 3 of 8

2007, that is exactly what the Plaintiffs' counsel and Defendants' spoke about on the very first conference call. There is no reason to believe that it cannot be finalized on Monday, given that despite the undersigned's vacation, the undersigned will be available to finalize the Joint Scheduling Report. 5. The Defendants have offered no reason why they believe that the filing of an

Amended Complaint in this action will "affect decisions about scheduling dates." As discussed in the Plaintiffs/Class Representatives' Response in opposition to the last motion to delay submitting a Joint Scheduling Report [DE 56], the Plaintiffs/Class Representatives are opposed to these lengthy delays and request that the hearing go forward as Ordered three (3) weeks ago for all of the reasons set forth above. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs/Class Representatives respectfully request this Court to enter an Order denying the Defendants, Mars, Incorporated, Procter and Gamble Co., ColgatePalmolive Co., Del Monte Foods Co., Nestle USA, Inc., Nutro Products, Inc., PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s, Motion for Continuance of Scheduling Hearing and for all other relief that the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, s/ Catherine J. MacIvor Catherine J. MacIvor, Florida Bar No. 932711 Maltzman Foreman PA 2 South Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2300 Miami, Florida 33131 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail]

3

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 4 of 8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 30, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of 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 not authorized to receive electronic Notices of Electronic Filing. SERVICE LIST Blaszkowski, et. al. v. Mars, Incorporated et. al. Case No. 07-21221-Civ-Altonaga/Turnoff United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Catherine J. MacIvor Maltzman Foreman P. A. One Biscayne Tower 2 South Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2300 Miami, Florida 33131 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs Rolando Andres Diaz Kubicki Draper 25 W. Flagler Street Penthouse Miami, FL 33130-1712 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Pet Supermarket, Inc. Service by: CM/ECF Charles Philip Flick Seipp Flick & Kissane 2 Alahambra Plaza Suite 800 Miami, FL 33134 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Target Corp. Susan E. Mortensen

4

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 5 of 8

Coffey Burlington Office in the Grove, Penthouse 2699 South Bayshore Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for PetSmart, Inc. Alan Graham Greer Richman Greer PA 201 S. Biscayne Boulevard Suite 1000 Miami, FL 33131 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Proctor and Gamble Co. Benjamine Reid Carlton Fields 100 SE 2nd Street Suite 4000, P.O. Box 019101 Miami, FL 33131-9101 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Colgate Palmolive Company Sherril May Colombo Cozen O'Connor 200 S. Biscayne Boulevard Suite 4410 Miami, FL 33131 Tel: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Del Monte Foods, Co. Carol Ann Licko Hogan & Hartson 1111 Brickell Avenue Suite 1900 Miami, FL 33131 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone]

5

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 6 of 8

Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Nestle U.S.A., Inc. Service by: CM/ECF Hugh J. Turner, Jr. Akerman Senterfitt & Eidson 350 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1600 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-0006 Tel: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Publix Supermarkets, Inc. Robert D. McIntosh Adorno & Yoss LLP 888 S.E. 3rd Avenue Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316-1159 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Menu Foods, Inc. Attorneys for Menu Foods Income Fund Robin Lea Hanger Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP 200 S. Biscayne Boulevard 40th Floor Miami, FL 33131-2398 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Omar Ortega Dorta & Ortega, P.A. 800 S. Douglas Road Douglas Entrance Suite 149 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Mars Inc. John Brian Thomas Murray, Jr.

6

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 7 of 8

Squire Sanders & Dempsey LLP 1900 Phillips Point West 777 S. Flagler Drive Suite 1900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-6198 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Philip A. Sechler Williams & Connolly LLP 725 12th ST. NW Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Mars Inc. John J. Kuster Sidley Austin LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10019 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Colgate Palmolive Co. D. Jeffrey Ireland Faruki Ireland & Cox P.L.L. 500 Courthouse Plaza, S.W. 10 North Ludlow Street Dayton, Ohio 45402 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Procter & Gamble Co. Service by: CM/ECF John J. McDonough Cozen O'Connor 45 Broadway New York, NY 10006 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone]

7

Case 1:07-cv-21221-CMA

Document 104

Entered on FLSD Docket 06/30/2007

Page 8 of 8

Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Del Monte Foods Co. John F. Mullen Cozen O'Connor 1900 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Del Monte Foods Co. Robert C. Troyer Hogan & Hartson, LLP 1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1500 Denver, Colorado 80202 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Nestle USA, Inc. Service by: CM/ECF Craig A. Hoover Hogan & Hartson, LLP 555 13th Street NW Washington, DC 20004-1109 Tel.: [phone] Fax.: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Nestle USA, Inc.

8