In re: ACEVEDO et al

Filing 17

Judge Rya W. Zobel: ORDER entered. re 14 MOTION to Stay filed by Melendez Negron Conyugal Partnership, Pablo Melendez Bonilla, Nydia Negron Contreras (Urso, Lisa)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-11736-RWZ IN RE ACEVEDO ORDER April 14, 2017 ZOBEL, S.D.J. Appellant, Vicente Perez Acevedo, appeals an August 4, 2016 decision and August 5, 2016 order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts that vacated default judgments against appellees, Pablo Melendéz Bonilla, Nydia María Negrón Contreras and their conjugal partnership, and Leniel Collazo Nazario, and dismissed the adversary proceeding for lack of jurisdiction. See Docket # 2, at 54-68. Appellant timely filed an appeal to this court, but sought two extensions to file his appeal brief, which he ultimately submitted on December 5, 2016. However, appellees did not file any responsive briefs. On March 28, 2017, appellees Pablo Melendéz Bonilla, Nydia María Negrón Contreras and their conjugal partnership moved to “Stay [the] Proceedings” because they did not receive any of the filings on this case docket as they “are not registered in the Notice of Electronic Filing.” Docket #14, at 3. To the extent that appellees’ motion to stay the proceedings (Docket # 14) is a motion for extension of time to file their responsive briefs, it is ALLOWED. The appellees shall file their responsive briefs of no more than 10 pages individually or 30 pages jointly, by May 5, 2017. The deputy courtroom clerk shall mail a copy of this order to the following appellees, including counsel for Pablo Melendéz Bonilla and Nydia María Negrón Contreras1: Leniel Collazo Nazario RUA Num. 17,472 1500 F. Montilla 410 N Bayamon, Puerto Rico 00956 Pablo Melendéz Urb. Country Club Calle 260 GY-29 Carolina, Puerto Rico 00982 Roberto O. Maldonado Nieves U.S. Id. 202209 344 Street #7 NE, Suite 1-A San Juan, Puerto Rico 00920 April 14, 2017 /s/Rya W . Zobel DATE RYA W . ZOBEL SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 Appellees Melendéz and Negrón further request that appellant, through his counsel send them , by regular m ail, “all m otions, notices, briefs and appendixes filed in this case.” Docket # 14, at 4. In their m otion, however, appellees note that “[they] decided to verify what had happened with the notice of appeal filed by [appellant]. . . . W e entered the case docket and discovered the orders entered by the Court, just as the brief and m otions subm itted by the Appellant.” Id. Accordingly, it appears appellees are sufficiently able to access the case docket electronically, and as such, there is no need for appellant to send to appellees all such requested docum ents. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?