UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-CV-81205-RAR

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v. 

COMPLETE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 

GROUP, INC. d/b/a PAR FUNDING, et al.,

Defendants.

______________________________________/ 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY AND REQUIRING MEDIATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Receiver’s Motion to Stay the Court’s 

Consideration of Motion to Approve Settlement with Eckert Seamans for Period of 90 Days and 

to Require Mediation (“Motion”), [ECF No. 2004], filed on July 31, 2024. The Court has carefully 

reviewed the Motion and the record, and finds that the Receiver has made a sufficient and proper 

showing in support of the requested relief. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Receiver’s Motion is GRANTED. 

2. The Receiver’s pending Motion for: (i) Approval of Settlement among Receiver, 

Putative Class Plaintiffs, and Eckert Seamans; (ii) Approval of Form, Content, and Manner of 

Notice of Settlement and Bar Order; (iii) Setting a Deadline to Object to Approval of the Settlement 

and Entry of Bar Order; and (iv) Scheduling a Hearing; with Incorporated Memorandum of Law

(“Eckert Seamans Motion”), [ECF No. 1861], including the Receiver’s deadline to file a reply in 

further support of the Eckert Seamans Motion, is hereby STAYED for a period of 90 days. 

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 2006 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2024 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

3. During this 90-day period, the Receiver, putative class counsel, Eckert Seamans, 

the Vagnozzi Group,1 the Parker Plaintiffs,2 and the Merchant Objectors3 (including all counsel, 

all clients, and all insurers) (collectively, the “Mediation Participants”) must participate in a 

mediation in an effort to resolve the pending objections to the Eckert Seamans Settlement, with 

the costs of mediation to be split six-ways, with one-sixth of the mediator’s fees to be paid for by 

each of the Mediation Participants.

4. The mediation conference in this matter shall be held with Michael A. Hanzman. 

The parties shall meet and confer to schedule a mediation with Mr. Hanzman and file their notice 

of scheduling mediation on or before August 9, 2024. The mediation shall be completed on or 

before October 18, 2024. 

5. At the conclusion of the mediation, the Mediation Parties shall file a status report 

indicating the outcome of the mediation and whether the stay of the Eckert Seamans Motion should 

remain in effect or be lifted.

6. The Final Approval Hearing set for August 13, 2024, [ECF No. 1945], is hereby 

CANCELLED. If necessary, the Court will re-schedule the Final Approval Hearing upon the 

conclusion of the mediation.4

1

 The Vagnozzi Group is Defendant Dean Vagnozzi and non-parties Alec Vagnozzi, Albert Vagnozzi, and 

Terry Kohler.

2

 The Parker Plaintiffs are the Plaintiffs in the case of Parker, et al. v. Pauciulo, et al., No. 20-00892 (Phila. 

Ct. Com. Pl. 2020).

3

 The Merchant Objectors are B & T Supplies, Inc. d/b/a B and T Supply d/b/a Biggest Book.com; Tzvi 

Odzer; Ruben Azrak; RKDK Inc. d/b/a Haagen Dazs; Gelato on Hudson LLC d/b/a Haagen Dazs; Asia Star 

Broadcasting Inc.; Daniel Shah; Perfect Impression Inc.; Susan Abrahams; Kara Dipietro; Carl Dorvil; 

Pamela Fleetwood; Robert Fleetwood; Fleetwood Services LLC; Michael Joseph Foti; Chad Frost; Gex 

Management Inc.; HMC, Inc.; Johnny Harrison, Sr.; Michael Heller; Julie Paula Katz; MH Marketing 

Solutions Group, Inc.; Petropangea Inc.; Radiant Images Inc.; Sunrooms Group Inc.; TourMappers 

NorthAmerica LLC; Volunteer Pharmacy, LLC; Sean Whalen; Giane Wolfe; and Iris Chen Yngyin.

4

 All Mediation Participants agree with the relief sought by the Receiver in his Motion, except for the 

Parker Plaintiffs. Mot. at 6. The Parker Plaintiffs object to the entry of a stay, cancelling the August 13, 

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 2006 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2024 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida, this 1st day of August, 2024.

_________________________________

RODOLFO A. RUIZ II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2024 hearing, and using a private mediator. Id. However, the Court does not believe that holding a final 

approval hearing or expending additional resources on adjudicating the Eckert Seamans Motion prior to 

mediation is an efficient use of the parties’ or the Court’s resources. Accordingly, these objections are 

overruled. 

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 2006 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2024 Page 3 of 3