Case ID: f-appx_706/html/0030-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Amal SHETIWY, and other similarly situated, Louis C. Yeostros, and other similarly situated, John Murphy, and other similarly situated, Plamen Pankoft, and other similarly situated, Patricia R. Diffley, Spiros Argyros, Johanna Arbelaez, Nicholas Doudalis, Nicole Gagnon, and other similarly situated, Safet Koljenovic, Magdi Abdalla, Ahmed Hassan, Ekatereine Skotedis, and other similarly situated, Vielka Vargas, and other similarly situated, Rose Villaneuva, and other similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, AKA Midland Funding LLC, Cavalry Portfolio Services LLC, DebtOne, LLC, CACH, LLC, LVNV Funding, LLC, Asset Acceptance LLC, FIA Card Services, N.A., Chase Bank USA N.A., American Express Company, Bank of America, N.A., Capital One Financial Advisors LLC, ARS National Services Inc., CitiGroup Inc., Citibank, N.A., GE Capital Consumer Lending, Inc., Equable Assent Financial, LLC, Capital One Financial Corporation, Cavalry SPV I, LLC, Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, AKA Portfolio Recovery, Defendants-Appellees, NCO Financial Systems, Incorporated, Capital Management Services, Defendants.
    
    16-2893-cv
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    December 15, 2017
    FOR PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS: Phillip Jaffe, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES Midland Credit Management, AKA Midland Funding, LLC and Asset Acceptance LLC: Casey D. Laffey and Nana Japar-idze, Reed Smith LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES Cavalry Portfolio Services LLC, Equable Assent Financial, LLC, and Cavalry SPV I, LLC: Donald S, Maurice, Jr., Maurice & Wutscher, LLP, Flemington, NJ.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE Deb-tOne, LLC: William Raley Alford, III, Stanley, Reuter, Ross, Thornton & Alford, L.L.C., New Orleans, LA.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE CACH, LLC: Manuel H. Newburger, Barron & Newburger, P.C., Austin, TX, and Jonathan J. Greystone, Spector Gadon <& Rosen, P.C., Philadelphia, PA.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE LVNV Funding, LLC: Concepcion A. Montoya and Kyle M. Medley, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES FIA Card Services, N.A. and Bank of America, N.A.: S. Elaine McChesney and Peter C. Neger, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE Chase Bank USA NA: Andrew A. RufS-no, Covington & Burling LLP, New York, NY, and Robert D. Wick and Henry B. Liu, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington, DC.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE American Express Company: Carmine' D. Boccuzzi, Jr., Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEES Capital One Financial Advisors, LLC and Capital One Financial Corporation; David John Fioccola and Jessica Kaufman, Morrison & Foerster LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE ARS' National Services Inc.: Richard J. Perr, Fineman Krekstein & Harris, Philadelphia, PA.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEES Ci-tiGroup Inc. and Citibank, N.A.: Stephen C. Robinson, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE GE Capital Consumer Lending, Inc.: Michael D: Hynes, DLA Piper LLP, New York, NY.
    FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, AKA Portfolio Recovery: Oren D. Langer, Robins, Kaplan L.L.P., New York, NY.
    PRESENT: José A. Cabranes, Debra A. Livingston, Susan L. Carney, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to amend the caption as shown above.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellants (“Plaintiffs”) appeal the District Court’s order of dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16(f) and 41(b).

In this case, Plaintiffs make no arguments concerning the District Court’s final order in their principal brief. An appellant is deemed to have waived arguable claims on an issue that is not argued in his or her principal brief. See, e.g., Gross v. Rell, 585 F.3d 72, 95 (2d Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the District Court’s order of July 25, 2016 is affirmed.

CONCLUSION

We AFFIRM the District Court’s order of July 25,2016.