UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

Case No. 22-cv-23753-MOORE/BECERRA

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., on behalf of

themselves and all similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al.,

Defendants.

/

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR COORDINATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE

FOR RESPONSES TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT

Defendants Tom Brady, Kevin O’Leary, and David Ortiz (collectively, “Defendants”) 

respectfully request that the Court set a coordinated briefing schedule for Defendants—and all 

other appearing defendants—to file their responses to the operative Amended Class Action 

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial (“Amended Class Action Complaint”) [ECF No. 16]. 

Currently, the response deadlines are staggered over a period of some five weeks, which is both 

an inefficient use of the Court’s resources and makes it impossible for all defendants to comply 

with the Court’s directive that “[m]ultiple ... Defendants shall file joint motions with co-parties 

unless there are clear conflicts of position.” PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER [ECF No. 5] at 1-2 

(bold emphasis omitted).

In support of this motion, Defendants state:

1. This action was filed on November 15, 2023. See ECF No. 1. 

2. The operative Amended Complaint was filed on December 16, 2022, after the Court

consolidated the then-pending FTX-related proceedings under this number and designated it as the 

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2023 Page 1 of 6
- 2 -

“lead case” in which “[a]ll future filings MUST be made[.]” See PAPERLESS ORDER 

CONSOLIDATING CASES, Podalsky v. Bankman-Fried, No. 22-cv-23983 (S.D. Fla.) [Podalsky 

ECF No. 7] at 1.1

3. Pursuant to Rule 4(m), FED. R. CIV. P., Plaintiffs must serve (or obtain a waiver of 

service from) every defendant by February 13, 2023. See id. (“If a defendant is not served within 

90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the 

plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be 

made within a specified time.”).

4. In addition, pursuant to the PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER, “the parties shall 

hold a scheduling conference no later than twenty (20) days after the filing of the first responsive 

pleading by the last responding defendant, or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the 

complaint, whichever occurs first. However, if all defendants have not been served by the 

expiration of this deadline, Plaintiff shall move for an enlargement of time to hold the scheduling

conference, not to exceed 90 days from the filing of the Complaint.” See id. at 1.

1 After filing this action on November 15, 2022, the same Plaintiffs’ counsel filed an action styled 

Norris v. Brady in Florida state court, which was removed to this Court on February 3, 2023, and 

assigned to Chief Judge Altonaga under Case No. 23-cv-20439 (the “Norris Action”). See 

Defendants’ Notice of Pending, Refiled, Related or Similar Action. [ECF No. 45] As a result, the 

Court has pending two nearly identical lawsuits—this action and the Norris Action—that trigger 

intra-district transfer issues governed by S.D. Fla. I.O.P. 2.06.00 and S.D. Fla. I.O.P. 2.15.00, 

which are issues to be addressed and resolved by the two Judges involved.

In addition to the related Norris Action, there are several additional pending lawsuits that raise 

issues also raised by this action, including In re FTX Trading Ltd., No. 22-11068 (JTD) (Bankr. 

D. Del.) (the “Bankruptcy Action”); United States v. Bankman-Fried, No. 22 Cr. 673 (LAK) 

(S.D.N.Y.) (the “Criminal Action”); SEC v. Bankman-Fried, No. 1:22-cv-10501-PKC (S.D.N.Y.) 

(the “SEC Action”); and Commodity Future Trading Commission v. Bankman-Fried, No. 1:22-

cv-10503-PKC (S.D.N.Y.) (the “CFTC Action”).

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2023 Page 2 of 6
- 3 -

5. To Defendants’ knowledge, only a few of the some eighteen defendants have been 

served or—to be specific—returned Rule 4 waivers of service. See ECF Nos. 17 (Golden State 

Warriors), 18 (David), 19 (Brady), 20 (Bündchen), 24 (Ortiz), 43 (O’Leary), 46 (Bankman-Fried).

6. As a result of these waivers of service, the dates for Defendants’ and other 

defendants’ responses to the Amended Complaint presently span a period of approximately five 

weeks, running from February 27, 2023 (Brady; Bündchen; David) to April 3, 2023 (BankmanFried).

7. Defendants submit that all defendants’ response deadlines should be consolidated 

such that a single deadline is set, which will enable (as appropriate) joint responses to the Amended 

Complaint to be filed, as mandated by the PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER. Defendants’ 

understanding is that the United States Attorney would not have concerns with Defendants 

proceeding with motions to dismiss.2

8. Given that plaintiffs’ time to serve defendants lapses on February 13, 2023 per Rule 

4(m), the last possible response date for any defendant would appear to be Friday, April 14, 2023, 

and thus Defendants propose that date as the date by which any served defendant shall respond to 

the Amended Complaint.

2 On January 30, 2023, Plaintiffs submitted a letter to the Court referencing a criminal case against 

Sam Bankman-Fried, a defendant in this action. Plaintiffs’ letter states that Plaintiffs were 

contacted by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who is prosecuting 

the Criminal Action, and that Plaintiffs understand that the United States Attorney may seek to 

stay some portion of this action. See ECF No. 29-1. 

Defendants recognize that the Court subsequently struck the letter as an improper filing under the

Local Rules. See ECF No. 48. Nonetheless, in light of Plaintiffs’ letter, counsel for Defendant 

Brady contacted the United States Attorney’s Office. Defendants’ current understanding is that 

the United States Attorney has concerns with certain party and/or third-party discovery that 

involves or implicates FTX defendants or witnesses proceeding in either the Norris Action or this 

action (among other currently pending actions). Specifically, the United States Attorney expressed 

concern that discovery in these actions could significantly interfere with the prosecution of the 

Criminal Action. See, e.g., CFTC Action ECF No. 33 at 7; SEC Action ECF No. 12 at 7. 

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2023 Page 3 of 6
- 4 -

CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that the Court establish April 14, 2023, as 

the date by which any served defendant (either via formal service or by virtue of waiver of service) 

shall respond to the Amended Complaint, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just 

and proper.

LOCAL RULE 7.1(A)(3) CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3), Christopher S. Carver, counsel for Defendant Ortiz, and 

Jessica Stebbins Bina, counsel for Defendant Brady, certify that they conferred with Howard 

Bushman, counsel for Plaintiffs, on February 9, 2023, by telephone conversation at approximately 

8:00 p.m. and by follow-up e-mail shortly thereafter, with respect to the request to establish April 

14, 2023, as the due date for all defendants’ responses to the Amended Complaint. As of the time 

of this filing (approximately 10:15 a.m.), Plaintiffs’ position is not known.

Dated: February 10, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

COLSON HICKS EIDSON, P.A.

255 Alhambra Circle, Penthouse

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Telephone: (305) 476-7400

Facsimile: (305) 476-7444

By: /s/ Roberto Martínez

Roberto Martínez

Florida Bar No. 305596

bob@colson.com

Stephanie A. Casey

Florida Bar No. 97483

scasey@colson.com

Zachary Lipshultz

Florida Bar No. 123594

zach@colson.com

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Andrew Clubok (pro hac vice) andrew.clubok@lw.com

Susan E. Engel (pro hac vice) susan.engel@lw.com

Brittany M.J. Record (pro hac vice)

 brittany.record@lw.com

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2023 Page 4 of 6
- 5 -

555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 1000

Washington, D.C. 20004-1304

Tel: +1.202.637.2200

Fax: +1.202.637.2201

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Marvin S. Putnam (pro hac vice)

 marvin.putnam@lw.com

Jessica Stebbins Bina (pro hac vice)

 jessica.stebbinsbina@lw.com

Elizabeth A. Greenman (pro hac vice)

 elizabeth.greenman@lw.com

10250 Constellation Blvd., Suite 1100

Los Angeles, California 90067

Tel: +1.424.653.5500

Fax: +1.424.653.5501

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

Michele D. Johnson (pro hac vice) michele.johnson@lw.com

650 Town Center Drive, 20th Floor

Costa Mesa, California 92626-1925

Tel: +1.714.540.1235

Fax: +1.714.755.8290

Attorneys for Defendant Thomas Brady

AKERMAN LLP

201 East Las Olas Boulevard – Suite 1800

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

Tel.: 954-463-2700

Fax: 954-468-2454

By: /s/ Christopher S. Carver

Christopher S. Carver

Florida Bar No. 993580

christopher.carver@akerman.com

Jason S. Oletsky, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 9301

jason.oletsky@akerman.com

Katherine A Johnson

Florida Bar No. 1040357

katie.johnson@akerman.com

Attorneys for Defendant David Ortiz

MARCUS NEIMAN RASHBAUM 

& PINEIRO LLP

100 Southeast Third Avenue, Suite 805

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394

Tel: (954) 462-1200

2 South Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2530

Miami, Florida 33131

Tel: (305)-400-4260

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2023 Page 5 of 6
- 6 -

By: /s/ Jeffrey Neiman

Jeffrey Neiman 

jneiman@mnrlawfirm.com

Fla Bar. No. 544469

Jeffrey Marcus 

jmarcus@mnrlawfirm.com

Fla. Bar No. 310890

Michael Pineiro

mpineiro@mnrlawfirm.com

Fla. Bar No. 041897

Brandon Floch

bfloch@mnrlawfirm.com

Fla. Bar No. 125218

BERK BRETTLER LLP

9119 Sunset Boulevard

West Hollywood, CA 90069

Tel.: (310) 278-2111

Andrew B. Brettler (pro hac vice)

abrettler@berkbrettler.com

Attorneys for Defendant Kevin O’Leary

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2023 Page 6 of 6