Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Rivus Pharmaceuticals Inc x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Contract: Other | Florida Southern
Order Dismissing/Closing Case or Party
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte review of the record. On June 29, 2026, the Court denied Plaintiff's counsel's Motion to Withdraw without prejudice, noting that allowing them to withdraw before Plaintiff had retained new counsel would force Plaintiff to proceed pro se, which it is not allowed to do as an LLC. (ECF No. 18) (citing Palazzo v. Gulf Oil Corp., 764 F.2d 1381, 1385 (11th Cir. 1985)). In that Order, the Court stayed the case and ordered Plaintiff to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, as Plaintiff had directed its attorneys "to take no further action in this case." Id. (citing (ECF No. 16) at 1). On July 7, 2026, Plaintiff indicated that it intends to continue litigating this case and Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff will retain new counsel. See generally (ECF Nos. 19-20). On July 8, 2026, the Court again denied Plaintiff's counsel's Renewed Motion to Withdraw without prejudice, as the motion did "not provide any sort of timeframe for when Plaintiff will retain new counsel." (ECF No. 21). The Court stated that if Plaintiff failed to retain new counsel by August 10, 2026, Plaintiff's Complaint 1 would be "dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute as Plaintiff has instructed its current attorneys to refrain from acting." (ECF No. 21). Now, that deadline has passed. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Court's Orders, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Complaint 1 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute based on Plaintiff's failure to comply with this Court's Orders and for Plaintiff's representation that its current attorneys should not take action in this case. Further, Plaintiff has failed to timely file a response to Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss 11 , and that deadline has long passed. Because Plaintiff did not respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 11 , the Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED by default. See S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(c)(1); France v. Ripa, No. 24-cv-24333, 2025 WL 973532, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2025). Therefore, Plaintiff's Complaint 1 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for this independent reason as well. The case is now CLOSED. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 8/12/2026. (hyn)
Notice (Other)
NOTICE of Plaintiff's Failure to Comply with the Court's Order Requiring Retention of Substitute Counsel by ProSciento Inc., Rivus Pharmaceuticals Inc. re 21 Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney,,,,,, (Fitzpatrick, Riley)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.