Case Activity (141)

1. Order | Filed: July 20, 2026 | Entered: July 20, 2026 LUKEZIC v. FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY, INC. et al

   Civil Rights: Other | District Of Columbia

   Order on Motion to Stay

   MINUTE ORDER denying the plaintiff's 85 Motion to Stay. The plaintiff previously requested, and the Court previously granted, a stay pending a determination from defendant Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.'s (FINRA) Office of Hearing Officers in the underlying disciplinary proceeding. See March 3, 2026 Minute Order; Motion to Stay, Dkt. 76. When the plaintiff's then-counsel sought the defendants' position on that prior 76 Motion to Stay, FINRA's counsel asked whether the plaintiff "envision[ed] that the stay would last until all administrative rights have been exhausted, including SEC review and potentially review in the DC Circuit." FINRA Defs.' Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. to Stay, Ex. 3, at 2, Dkt. 86-3. The plaintiff's then-counsel responded: "It is not our intention to try to stay this case after the initial decision by the Hearing Panel is issued. If further proceedings are needed before the FINRA National Adjudicatory Council or the SEC, etc., we believe this case can proceed despite those reviews." Id. at 1. The plaintiff has now filed a 85 Motion to Stay this case "pending final resolution of [his] administrative appeal within FINRA and, if applicable, any further administrative review by the Securities and Exchange Commission." Mot. 2, Dkt. 85.
   
   The Court finds that a stay is not appropriate here. First, the plaintiff has not explained his change in position regarding whether this case can proceed despite any further administrative proceedings. Second, the plaintiff has failed to offer sufficient grounds to justify an open-ended stay during the pendency of those proceedings, particularly in light of the defendants' anticipated jurisdictional defenses. See FINRA Defs.' Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. to Stay 10, Dkt. 86.
   
   Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff's 85 Motion to Stay is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall file, on or before August 7, 2026, a joint status report proposing a schedule to govern further proceedings. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on July 20, 2026. (lcdlf1)

2. Response | Filed: July 02, 2026 | Entered: July 02, 2026 LUKEZIC v. FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY, INC. et al

   Civil Rights: Other | District Of Columbia

   Memorandum in opposition to motion

   Memorandum in opposition to re 85 MOTION to Stay filed by CAPITAL CLIENT GROUP, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Def. Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit Def. Exhibit 2)(Cole, Richard)

3. 139 additional result(s)