UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-22984-CV-O’SULLIVAN

[CONSENT]

MENDEZ FUEL HOLDINGS, LLC, MENDEZ FUEL

HOLDINGS 1, LLC, MENDEZ FUEL HOLDINGS 2,

LLC, and MENDEZ FUEL HOLDINGS 3 LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

KENDALL HEALTHCARE GROUP, LTD.,

Defendant, 

and 

7-ELEVEN, INC. and SEI FUEL SERVICES, INC.,

Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs,

v.

MENDEZ FUEL HOLDINGS 3 LLC and MICHAEL

MENDEZ,

Counterclaim Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs 7-

Eleven, Inc. and SEI Fuel Services, Inc.[’s] Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond 

to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE# 98, 8/11/21). The defendants/

counterclaim plaintiffs 7-Eleven, Inc. and SEI Fuel Services, Inc. (collectively “SEIF 

Defendants”) maintain that they did not receive notice of the Mendez Fuel Holdings 3, 

Case 1:20-cv-22984-JJO Document 99 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/11/2021 Page 1 of 3
2

LLC and Michael Mendez’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Count II of the Complaint 

and Count V of the Second Amended Counterclaim (DE# 88, 6/14/21). See

Declarations of Eric Koenig and Urs Broderick Furrer (DE# 95-96 at ¶ 2, 8/9/21) 

(attesting that they “never received notification that Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Summary 

Judgment on Count II of the Complaint and Count V of the Second Amended 

Counterclaims.”). 

The plaintiffs/counter-defendants Mendez Fuel Holdings 3, LLC and Michael 

Mendez do not take the SEIF Defendants’ representations at face value. See Plaintiffs’ 

Reply to Defendants’ Response to Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for Summary 

Judgment on Count II of the Complaint and Count V of the Second Amended 

Counterclaim (DE# 97 at 2, 8/10/21) ( “Plaintiffs submit that a review of Defendants’ 

Response [ECF 94] raises even more questions as opposed to answering the precise 

question that was posed by the Court in the August 6, 2021 Order”). 

The Court has discretion in enforcing the Local Rules. See Fluor Intercontinental, 

Inc. v. IAP Worldwide Servs., Inc., 533 F. App’x 912, 922 n. 35 (11th Cir. 2013) (noting 

that “a district court has discretion to waive or excuse noncompliance with its local 

rules.”). Moreover, summary judgment motions must be decided on the merits. “A

district court cannot base the entry of summary judgment on the mere fact that the 

motion was unopposed, but, rather, must consider the merits of the motion.” United 

States v. One Piece of Real Prop. Located at 5800 SW 74th Ave., Miami, Fla., 363 F.3d 

1099, 1101 (11th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs 7-

Eleven, Inc. and SEI Fuel Services, Inc.[’s] Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond 

Case 1:20-cv-22984-JJO Document 99 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/11/2021 Page 2 of 3
3

to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE# 98, 8/11/21) is GRANTED. The 

SEIF Defendants shall have until Monday, August 23, 2021 to file a response to the 

Mendez Fuel Holdings 3, LLC and Michael Mendez’s Motion for Summary Judgment on 

Count II of the Complaint and Count V of the Second Amended Counterclaim (DE# 88, 

6/14/21) and the Plaintiffs/Counterclaim Defendants Mendez Fuel Holdings 3, LLC and 

Michael Mendez’s Statement of Undisputed Material Facts.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 11th day of

August, 2021. 

_______________________________________

JOHN J. O'SULLIVAN

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:20-cv-22984-JJO Document 99 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/11/2021 Page 3 of 3