UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

LUIS MANUEL RODRIGUEZ, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

IMPERIAL BRANDS PLC, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 1:20-cv-23287-DPG 

MOVING DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN ORDER SETTING 

COORDINATED MOTION TO DISMISS PROCEDURE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

Defendants Imperial Brands plc (“Imperial”), WPP plc, Young & Rubicam LLC, and BCW 

LLC (collectively, the “Moving Defendants”), respectfully request that the Court enter an order 

providing for the following deadlines and procedures related to the Moving Defendants’ responses 

to the Complaint filed by Plaintiffs Luis Manuel Rodriguez, Maria Teresa Rodriguez, Alfredo 

Ramon Forns, Ramon Alberto Rodriguez, Raul Lorenzo Rodriguez, Christina Conroy, and 

Francisco Ramon Rodriguez (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). This motion is made subject to and 

without waiver of any of the Moving Defendants’ defenses, including defenses based on lack of 

personal jurisdiction. 

1. On September 23, 2020, this Court stayed the above-captioned action through 

February 9, 2021, pending a decision on Imperial’s application pursuant to European Union and 

United Kingdom law for authorization to defend against this lawsuit or, at a minimum, to file and 

litigate a motion to dismiss this case. [D.E. 49]. As set forth in Imperial’s February 8, 2021, status 

report [D.E. 64, 64-1], the United Kingdom Department for International Trade has now granted 

Imperial permission to file and litigate a motion to dismiss. [D.E. 64, 64-1]. 

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/09/2021 Page 1 of 5
2 

2. The Moving Defendants intend to move to dismiss the Complaint, including on 

the basis that they are not subject to the Court’s jurisdiction. The Moving Defendants have 

conferred with Plaintiffs, who consent to the procedure proposed below. The Moving Defendants’ 

proposal is comparable to the procedure this Court approved in another pending case brought under 

Title III of the Helms-Burton Act. See Paperless Order, North Am. Sugar Indust., Inc. v. Xinjiang 

Goldwind Sci. & Tech. Co., Ltd. et al., No. 1:20-cv-22471-DPG (Aug. 25, 2020), D.E. 45. 

3. For the following reasons, the Moving Defendants respectfully submit that page 

limit expansions and joint briefing on common issues are necessary and appropriate: 

i. Local Rule 7.1(c)(2) limits motions and their incorporated memoranda of law 

to twenty (20) pages absent approval from the Court. 

ii. This Court’s Notice of Court Practice [D.E. 9] instructed the parties to file 

joint motions unless there are clear conflicts of position. 

iii. The Complaint raises novel issues. The first action under Title III of the 

Helms-Burton Act was filed in May 2019, and there is limited decisional law construing 

Title III. 

iv. The Moving Defendants have conferred and have agreed to move jointly on 

all grounds for dismissal that do not require individualized argument. The joint grounds 

for dismissal include lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Plaintiffs lack Article III 

standing), and that the Complaint does not plausibly plead a Title III claim. 

v. The Moving Defendants also intend to move for dismissal on the grounds 

that they cannot constitutionally be subjected to personal jurisdiction in this forum and 

that Title III cannot constitutionally be applied to them based on their respective alleged 

conduct, but because those issues are inherently individualized, Imperial (individually), 

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/09/2021 Page 2 of 5
3 

and WPP plc, Young & Rubicam LLC and BCW LLC (together), propose to file separate 

briefs on those issues. The Moving Defendants do not require an extension of the ordinary 

page limit for their individual briefs. 

vi. In order to comply with the Court’s joint-briefing requirement, and in light 

of the substantial jurisdictional, constitutional, and pleading issues raised by the 

Complaint, the Moving Defendants request an additional number of pages beyond the 

applicable page limit, to fully and adequately address the joint arguments outlined above. 

vii. Based on the foregoing, the Moving Defendants respectfully request 

permission to exceed the page limit by five (5) pages for their joint motion, and thereby 

file a joint motion and incorporated memorandum of law for a total of no more than 

twenty-five (25) pages. The Moving Defendants further request that they be permitted to 

file two separate motions and memoranda of law on their individualized arguments, as 

outlined above (one by Imperial, and the other by WPP plc, Young & Rubicam LLC and 

BCW LLC collectively), each of which will total no more than twenty (20) pages. 

4. In an effort to move forward expeditiously now that the stay has expired, the 

Moving Defendants have conferred and respectfully request that the Court order the following 

deadlines and adopt the following procedures: 

i. The Moving Defendants shall move to dismiss the Complaint on or before 

February 26, 2021. 

ii. Plaintiffs shall respond to the Moving Defendants’ joint motion to dismiss 

and their separate motions to dismiss on individualized arguments by March 26, 2021. 

Plaintiffs’ response to the joint motion shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages, and 

Plaintiffs’ responses to the two separate motions shall not exceed twenty (20) pages each. 

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/09/2021 Page 3 of 5
4 

iii. The Moving Defendants shall be permitted to file reply briefing by April 

16, 2021, as follows: a reply in support of their joint motion not to exceed fifteen (15) 

pages, and separate replies in support of their motion to dismiss on individualized 

arguments not to exceed ten (10) pages each. 

iv. From the discussion with Plaintiffs’ counsel at the Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) 

conference that preceded the filing of this motion, the Moving Defendants understand that 

defendant Corporación Habanos, S.A. (“Habanos”) was not served with the summons and 

Complaint until recently. That summons requires Habanos to respond within sixty days 

of service. [D.E. 57]. Subject to the Court’s approval, the Moving Defendants respectfully 

request that they not be required to wait another two months to seek dismissal, until 

Habanos’s response is due. The Moving Defendants respectfully suggest that it may be 

helpful for the Court to review their arguments alongside similar arguments that have 

been made in the North American Sugar matter. 

5. For these reasons, Moving Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter an 

order: (1) granting this Motion; and (2) entering the proposed order, attached as Exhibit A, 

adopting the briefing schedule and other procedures set forth in this Motion.

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/09/2021 Page 4 of 5
5 

LOCAL RULE 7.1(A)(3) CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH CONFERENCE 

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3), undersigned counsel for the Moving Defendants certify 

that they conferred on behalf of the Moving Defendants with counsel for Plaintiffs on February 8, 

2021, in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in this Motion. Plaintiffs agree to the briefing 

schedule and page limits sought herein. 

Dated: February 9, 2021 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Mark F. Raymond 

NELSON MULLINS BROAD AND CASSEL 

Mark F. Raymond 

Mark.Raymond@nelsonmullins.com 

Jonathan Etra 

jonathan.etra@nelsonmullins.com 

2 South Biscayne Blvd. 21st Floor 

Miami, FL 33131 

Telephone: 305-373-9400 

ALLEN & OVERY LLP 

Andrew Rhys Davies (admitted pro hac vice) 

andrewrhys.davies@allenovery.com 

Justin L. Ormand (admitted pro hac vice) 

justin.ormand@allenovery.com 

1221 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, NY 10020 

Telephone: 212-610-6300 

Attorneys for Defendant Imperial Brands plc 

/s/ Naim S. Surgeon 

AKERMAN LLP 

Naim S. Surgeon 

Florida Bar No. 101682 

naim.surgeon@akerman.com 

Pedro Freyre 

Florida Bar No. 192140 

pedro.freyre@akerman.com 

3 Brickell City Centre 

98 Southeast 7th St., Suite 1100 

Miami, Florida 33131 

Telephone: 305-982-5507 

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE 

AND DORR LLP 

Christopher Davies (admitted pro hac vice) 

christopher.davies@wilmerhale.com 

Jessica Lutkenhaus (admitted pro hac vice) 

jessica.lutkenhaus@wilmerhale.com 

1875 Pennsylvania Ave NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

Telephone: (202) 663-6000 

Attorneys for Defendants WPP plc, Young & 

Rubicam LLC, and BCW LLC, a/k/a Burson 

Cohn & Wolfe LLC

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/09/2021 Page 5 of 5