RESH et al v. BROSNAC et al

Filing 36

ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE MOTION OF DEFENDANT REALTY CONCEPTS TO STRIKE AND OR SET ASIDE I S DISMISSED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFFS SHALL HAVE UNTIL APRIL 30, 2012 TO SERVE ORIGINAL PROCESS UPON DEFENDANT REALTY CONCEPTS AND TO FILE PROOF OF SUCH SERVICE. FAILURE TO PROPERLY SERVE AND FILE PROOF OF SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE W ITH THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO RULE 4(M) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE MOTION OF REALTY CONCEPTS TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED AS MOOT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR REALTY CONCEPTS TO RE-FILE A MOTION TO DISMISS IF PLAINTIFFS PERFECT AND FILE PROOF OF SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 3/29/12. 3/30/12 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mas, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RONALD RESH; and
VALERIE RESH, individually and
as trustees of the Resh
Living Trust
Plaintiffs
vs.
ANDREW BROSNAC; and
REALTY CONCEPTS,
Defendants

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action
No. 11-cv-01924

O R D E R
Now, this 29th day of March, 2012, upon consideration
of the following documents:
(1)

Plaintiffs’ Request for Entry of Default Pursuant
to Rule 55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, which request was filed July 1, 2011
(Document 16);

(2)

Plaintiffs’ Request for Entry of a Default
Judgment Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 55(b)(1), which request was filed
July 5, 2011 (Document 18); together with
(a)

(3)

Affidavit of Richard H. Wix, Esquire,
notarized July 5, 2011 (Document 18-1);

Motion of Realty Concepts, Ltd. to Strike the
Entry of Default and Default Judgment or, in the
Alternative, to Set Aside the Entry of Default and
Default Judgment, which motion to strike or set
aside was filed July 27, 2011 (Document 22)
(“Motion to Strike or Set Aside”); together with,
(a)

Memorandum of Law in Support of the
Motion of Realty Concepts, Ltd. to
Strike the Entry of Default and Default
Judgment or, in the Alternative, to Set
Aside the Entry of Default and Default
Judgment (Document 22-1) (“Memo in
Support of Motion to Strike or Set
Aside”);

(b)

Exhibit A, Affidavit of Service of
Richard H. Wix, Esquire, notarized
June 20, 2011 (Document 22-2);

(c)

Exhibit B, Letter from Lance E. Armo,
Esquire, General Counsel for Realty
Concepts to Richard H. Wix, Esquire,
counsel for plaintiffs, dated July 11,
2011 (Document 22-3);

(4)

Memorandum of Plaintiffs in Opposition to the
Motion of Realty Concepts, Ltd. to Strike the
Entry of Default Judgment, which memorandum was
filed August 4, 2011 (Document 24)(“Memo Opposing
Motion to Strike or Set Aside”);

(5)

Reply Brief to Plaintiff’s Opposition to the
Motion of Realty Concepts, to Strike the Entry of
Default Judgment, which reply brief was filed with
leave of court on August 15, 2011 (Document 27);

(6)

Motion of Realty Concepts, Ltd. to Dismiss the
Complaint, which motion was filed August 25, 2011
(Document 29)(“Motion to Dismiss”); together with
(a)

(7)

Memorandum of Law in Support of the
Motion of Realty Concepts, Ltd. to
Dismiss the Complaint (Document 29-1)
(“Memo in Support of Motion to
Dismiss”); and

Memorandum of Plaintiffs in Opposition to Realty
Concepts, Ltd.’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint,
which memorandum was filed September 15, 2011
(Document 32)(“Memo Opposing Motion to Dismiss”);

it appearing that plaintiffs have not perfected service of the
Complaint upon defendant Realty Concepts, and for the reasons
expressed in the accompanying Opinion,
IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ request for entry of
default is denied.

- ii -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs’ request for
entry of a default judgment is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of defendant
Realty Concepts to strike and or set aside is dismissed as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs shall have until
April 30, 2012 to serve original process upon defendant Realty
Concepts and to file proof of such service.

Failure to properly

serve and file proof of service in accordance with this order may
result in dismissal pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of Realty
Concepts to dismiss the Complaint is dismissed as moot without
prejudice for Realty Concepts to re-file a motion to dismiss if
plaintiffs perfect and file proof of service in accordance with
this Order.
BY THE COURT:

/s/ James Knoll Gardner
James Knoll Gardner
United States District Judge

- iii -