Miami Valley Fair Housing Center, Inc. v. Paradise Residency, LLC

• Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
• Decided: October 3, 2025
• Docket: 3:25-cv-00007
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

MIAMI VALLEY FAIR HOUSING CENTER, INC.,

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:25-cv-7

vs.

PARADISE RESIDENCY, LLC, District Judge Michael J. Newman et al., Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry

Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER: (1) REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT BY OCTOBER 22, 2025; (2) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS; AND (3) REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO FILE ANY RENEWED MOTIONS DIRECTED AT PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED COMPLAINT BY NOVEMBER 5, 2025 ______________________________________________________________________________

This is a civil case in which Plaintiff Miami Valley Fair Housing Center, Inc. alleges violations of the Fair Housing Act against Defendants Paradise Residency, LLC; Red Paradise, LLC; and Saurin Shah. Doc. No. 1. Subsequently, Defendants filed a counterclaim against Plaintiff for declaratory and injunctive relief. Doc. No. 4. Now pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings. Doc. No. 7. Plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition (Doc. No. 11), and Defendants filed a reply (Doc. No. 12). Defendants have moved for judgment asserting Plaintiff lacks standing under Article III of the Constitution. Doc. No. 7 at PageID 121. To survive such a motion, standing must be “facially plausible” in the complaint. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 663 (2009); Ass'n of Am. Physicians & Surgeons v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 13 F.4th 531, 543 (6th Cir. 2021). Plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating “standing as to each claim and each type of relief sought.” Patterson v. United HealthCare Ins. Co., 76 F.4th 487, 493 (6th Cir. 2023). A complaint states a plausible claim when it states “enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence” that a plaintiff has standing. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 545

(2007). Once a plaintiff has demonstrated standing, a court has jurisdiction to consider the ultimate merits of the claims raised by that plaintiff. Mays v. LaRose, 951 F.3d 775, 782 (6th Cir. 2020) (citing Vill. of Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 264 & n. 9 (1977)). Standing may be clarified through the filing of an amended complaint. Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 501 (1975). Leave to amend must be “freely” given “when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). In considering the Supreme Court’s holding in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine and the Sixth Circuit’s recent holding in Tennessee Conference of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Lee, the Court requires Plaintiff to AMEND its complaint by October 22, 2025. 602 U.S. 367 (2024); 139 F.4th 557 (6th Cir. 2025). If Defendants then choose

to file a renewed motion for judgment on the pleadings, or a motion to dismiss, they must do so by November 5, 2025. Accordingly, Defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. October 3, 2025 s/Michael J. Newman Hon. Michael J. Newman United States District Judge