Devenair Fultz v. Freightvana Logistics, Inc., Nationwide Truck Line, Inc., Target Corporation, and Fatmir Mecaj

E.D. Louisiana

Devenair Fultz v. Freightvana Logistics, Inc., Nationwide Truck Line, Inc., Target Corporation, and Fatmir Mecaj

District Court, E.D. Louisiana·Decided January 9, 2026·No. 2:25-cv-01312·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA DEVENAIR FULTZ CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 25-1312 FREIGHTVANA LOGISTICS, INC., SECTION “B” (2) NATIONWIDE TRUCK LINE, INC., TARGET CORPORATION, AND FATMIR MECAJ ORDER AND REASONS Considering the plaintiff’s Ex Parte Consent Motion to Continue Submission Date for Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 38), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion (Rec. Doc. 38) is GRANTED in part by allowing an extension of the January 21, 2026 submission date of the dismissal motion to February 18, 2026. As the basis for its dismissal motion, the corporate defendants argue the absence of factual allegations and legal support for certain claims against them (Rec. Doc. 34-2). Even if continued, circuit precedent would require an opportunity for amending the complaint to resolve those deficiencies—provided that amendment would not be a futile gesture. See Stripling v. Jordan Prod. Co., LLC, 234 F.3d 863, 872–73 (5th Cir. 2000) (noting that while Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) requires leave to amend be “freely given,” courts still have discretion to deny a motion to amend if the amendment would be futile). The requested limited extension should allow sufficient time for parties to parties to reach an accommodation on the dismissal motion in view of latter precedent or the entire case.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 8th day of January 2026 ______________________________________ SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA DEVENAIR FULTZ CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 25-1312 FREIGHTVANA LOGISTICS, INC., SECTION “B” (2) NATIONWIDE TRUCK LINE, INC., TARGET CORPORATION, AND FATMIR MECAJ ORDER AND REASONS Considering the plaintiff’s Ex Parte Consent Motion to Continue Submission Date for Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 38), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion (Rec. Doc. 38) is GRANTED in part by allowing an extension of the January 21, 2026 submission date of the dismissal motion to February 18, 2026. As the basis for its dismissal motion, the corporate defendants argue the absence of factual allegations and legal support for certain claims against them (Rec. Doc. 34-2). Even if continued, circuit precedent would require an opportunity for amending the complaint to resolve those deficiencies—provided that amendment would not be a futile gesture. See Stripling v. Jordan Prod. Co., LLC, 234 F.3d 863, 872–73 (5th Cir. 2000) (noting that while Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) requires leave to amend be “freely given,” courts still have discretion to deny a motion to amend if the amendment would be futile). The requested limited extension should allow sufficient time for parties to parties to reach an accommodation on the dismissal motion in view of latter precedent or the entire case.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 8th day of January 2026 ______________________________________ SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Devenair Fultz v. Freightvana Logistics, Inc., Nationwide Truck Line, Inc., Target Corporation, and Fatmir Mecaj, (E.D. La. 2026).

Pincite

Devenair Fultz v. Freightvana Logistics, Inc., Nationwide Truck Line, Inc., Target Corporation, and Fatmir Mecaj (Devenair Fultz v. Freightvana Logistics, Inc., Nationwide Truck Line, Inc., Target Corporation, and Fatmir Mecaj) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related