LIEBERMAN v. CORPORACION EXPERIENCA UNICA, S.A. et al

Filing 64

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO APPOINT RECEIVER 45 IS DENIED; PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY 49 IS GRANTED; DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS 57 IS DENIED; AND, DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY 60 IS GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 12/27/2016. 12/28/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(nds)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RICHARD LIEBERMAN,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiff,
v.
CORPORACION EXPERIENCA
UNICA, S.A., et al.,
Defendants.

RICHARD KREIBICH, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PLAYA DULCE VIDA, S.A., et al.,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 14-3393

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 14-5102

O R D E R
AND NOW, this 27TH day of December, 2016, for the
reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum, the following
is hereby ORDERED:
In the case of Lieberman v. Corporacion Experienca Unica,
S.A., No. 14-3393:
(1)

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Appoint Receiver (ECF No.
45) is DENIED.

(2)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Reply (ECF

No. 49) is GRANTED.
(3)

Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
(ECF No. 57) is DENIED.

(4)

Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Reply (ECF
No. 60) is GRANTED.

In the case of Kreibich v. Playa Dulce Vida, S.A., No.
14-5102:
(1)

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No.
32) is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs’ claims of alter
ego liability/piercing the corporate veil and of
tortious interference with contract, but DENIED
as to the remainders of Plaintiffs’ claims.

(2)

Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
(ECF No. 41) is DENIED.

(3)

Defendants’ Motions for Leave to File Reply (ECF
Nos. 37, 44) are GRANTED.

(4)

Plaintiffs’ Motions for Leave to File Sur-Replies
(ECF Nos. 38, 39) are GRANTED.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Eduardo C. Robreno
EDUARDO C. ROBRENO,
J.

2