Velasquez v. Universal Protection Service, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedSeptember 10, 2024
Docket1:24-cv-04795
StatusUnknown

This text of Velasquez v. Universal Protection Service, LLC (Velasquez v. Universal Protection Service, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Velasquez v. Universal Protection Service, LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ZION M. VELASQUEZ and RISHMA Case No.: 1:24-cv-04795-JLR ANOOP, on behalf of themselves, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and the Class, Plaintiffs, v. UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE, LLC, d/b/a ALLIED UNIVERSAL, Defendant.

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT

In support of its concurrently filed Motion for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, Defendant Universal Protection Service, LLC d/b/a/ Allied Universal Security Services (“Allied Universal”), by and through its undersigned attorneys, respectfully requests that this Court take judicial notice of the following pleadings in Carlton, et al. v. Universal Protection Service, LP, No. 8:24-cv-751, currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California: • The Original Complaint [Doc. 1], attached hereto as Exhibit 1; • The Amended Complaint [Doc. 17], attached hereto as Exhibit 2; and • The Order Granting Transfer of Venue [Doc. 63], attached hereto as Exhibit 3. Judicial notice is proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 201 because the matters requesting to be judicially noticed are pleadings on file in a United States District Court and, as such, are not subject to reasonable dispute. Allied Universal is submitting these pleadings to demonstrate the fact that they were filed and what is stated within the four corners of the filings. See HSA Residential Mortg. Servs. of Tex. v. Casuccio, 350 F. Supp. 3d 352, 361 (E.D.N.Y. 2003) (citing Kramer v. Time Warner, Inc. , 937 F.2d 767, 774 (2d Cir. 1991) for the proposition that it is proper for a court to take judicial notice of the pleadings and filings in another lawsuit).

Dated this 9th day of September 2024. Respectfully submitted,

shall submit their position on /s/ Evan S. Weiss __ dant' for judicial notice b Evan S. Weiss request tor Judicial notice by Robin E. Largent (pro hac vice pending) 13, 2024. Robert D. Wilson III (admitted pro hac vice) Martenson, Hasbrouck & Simon LLP September 10, 2024 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1502 New York, New York New York, NY 10005 Tel: (332) 345-2470 Email: rlargent@martensonlaw.com Kocher eweiss@martensonlaw.com L. ROCHON rwilson@martensonlaw.com States District Judge Attorneys for Defendant UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE, LLC D/B/A ALLIED UNIVERSAL SECURITY SERVICES

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

Related

Kramer v. Time Warner Inc
937 F.2d 767 (Second Circuit, 1991)
Oliver v. Dep't of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.
350 F. Supp. 3d 340 (D. Maryland, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Velasquez v. Universal Protection Service, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/velasquez-v-universal-protection-service-llc-nysd-2024.