Case Activity (445)

1. Order | Filed: June 22, 2026 | Entered: June 22, 2026 THREE S DELAWARE, INC. et al v. DATAQUICK INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. et al

   Other Statutory Actions | New Jersey

   Text Order

   TEXT ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs' counsel's correspondence. (ECF No. 34 .) Plaintiffs request that the Court "hold the pending motions to dismiss in abeyance until June 25, 2026, to permit the filing of an independent motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(3)." (Id. at 1 (citations omitted) (citing ECF Nos. 28-33).) The Court declines Plaintiffs' request. As discussed on the record at the February 5, 2026 teleconference and agreed to by all parties, the Court must determine the key, threshold issues of personal jurisdiction and venue before assessing the substance of Plaintiffs' claims--whether Defendants perpetrated a fraud on the United States District Court for the District of Maryland twenty years ago. As the undersigned explained to Plaintiffs' counsel on the record, Plaintiffs' 76-page, 256-paragraph complaint and 912 pages of exhibits outline the basis for Plaintiffs' claims under Rule 60(d)(3) in voluminous detail. (See generally ECF No. 1 .) Before the Court may assess the merits of Plaintiffs' Rules 60(b) and 60(d) claims--let alone a redundant, improper motion seeking the same relief under the same Federal Rule--it must determine whether it can assess those merits with respect to Defendants at all. See, e.g., Haller v. Usman, No. 22-773, 2022 WL 17131854, at *2 (D.N.J. Nov. 18, 2022) (holding that without personal jurisdiction over defendants, a court "cannot act"); Fink v. Bishop, No. 22-10978, 2023 WL 2025172, at *1-2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 25, 2023) (assessing jurisdiction and venue before deciding the underlying merits of Rule 60(d)(1) and 60(d)(3) complaint). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' request is DENIED. Additionally, to the extent that Plaintiffs' counsel's 14-page letter raises substantially the same "unproductive" merits arguments included in his previously stricken letter, (ECF Nos. 25 , 27 ), those arguments are again STRICKEN and the Court will not consider them in deciding the pending motions. So Ordered by Judge Robert Kirsch on 06/22/2026. (pdm)

2. Misc | Filed: June 14, 2026 | Entered: June 14, 2026 THREE S DELAWARE, INC. et al v. DATAQUICK INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. et al

   Other Statutory Actions | New Jersey

   Letter

   Letter from Counsel for Plaintiffs Seeking Abeyance of Motions to Dismiss. (CURCIO, BENJAMIN)

3. 443 additional result(s)