UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

ROBERT HOLLAND )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Case No. 2:13-CV-00491-RL-JEM

)

CEREBERUS CAPITAL )

MANAGEMENT, L.P., et al., )

)

Defendants. )

CERBERUS DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE TO

THE COURT OF CHRYSLER IGNITION SWITCH RECALL AND RICO CASE

STATEMENT

Cerberus Capital Management, LP, Robert Nardelli, and Stephen Feinberg

(“Cerberus Defendants”), by and through their counsel, and pursuant to Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), respectfully move the Court to strike Plaintiff’s Notice

to the Court of Chrysler Ignition Switch Recall (Dkt No. 77) and RICO Case

Statement (Dkt No. 78), as immaterial and redundant, and in support of this motion

state as follows:

1. On July 31, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Notice to the Court of Chrysler

Ignition Switch Recall (Dkt No. 77) (“Notice”) and RICO Case Statement (Dkt No.

78) (“Case Statement”).

2. The Notice purports to relate to a recall notice issued by Chrysler

concerning 2005-2007 Jeep Grand Cherokees and 2006-2007 Jeep Commander

vehicles.

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 79 filed 08/01/14 page 1 of 4
2

3. The Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint asserts that he purchased a

“Chrysler 300 vehicle”, which he also refers to as a “2006 Chrysler 300” (e.g., Dkt

No. 1, ¶¶ 52, 55, 59, 61-62, 73-74, 77, 79, 81, 86, 93, 102, 106, and 109-110).

4. Nowhere in his Verified Complaint, or in any other pleading filed by

the Plaintiff, does he allege that he purchased a 2005-2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee or

a 2006-2007 Jeep Commander.

5. Because the Chrysler recall notice referenced in Plaintiff’s Notice

refers to vehicles completely different from, and unrelated to, Plaintiff’s allegations,

the Notice is immaterial and should be stricken.

6. Plaintiff’s Case Statement says that it is “intended as a Response to

the Motion to Dismiss filed by all the Defendants in this case.” (Case Statement,

introductory paragraph). 7. Even a cursory review of the Case Statement indicates that Plaintiff’s

assertion that it is “intended as a Response to the Motion to Dismiss filed by all the

Defendants in this case” is inaccurate. That is, the Case Statement is nothing more

than a reiteration of arguments Plaintiff has made in his already filed responses to

the motions to dismiss filed by Cerberus Defendants and Bosak Defendants. (see

Dkt Nos. 58 & 67).1

8. Inasmuch as the Case Statement is nothing more than an effort by the

Plaintiff to have another chance to respond to the Cerbereus Defendants’ motion to

dismiss it is at a minimum redundant, and therefore, should be stricken.

1 Defendants Kimberly Johnson and TD Auto Finance LLC, filed their Motion to Dismiss

and Memorandum of Support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on July 24, 2014 (Dkt No.

69). Plaintiff has yet to file a response to that Motion to Dismiss.

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 79 filed 08/01/14 page 2 of 4
3

9. Further, while Local Rule 7-1 contemplates the filing of a response in

opposition to a party’s motion, and the filing of a reply in support of a motion, it

does not contemplate or provide for the filing of what is essentially a second

response in opposition to a motion. For the reasons set forth above, Cerberus Defendants respectfully move the

Court to strike Plaintiff’s Notice to the Court of Chrysler Ignition Switch Recall

(Dkt No. 77) and RICO Case Statement (Dkt No. 78), as immaterial and redundant. Respectfully submitted,

s/ Mark D. Stuaan

Jason R. Barclay

Mark D. Stuaan

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

11 South Meridian Street

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Telephone: 317/236-1313

Facsimile: 317/231-7433

E-Mail: jason.barclay@btlaw.com

E-Mail: mark.stuaan@btlaw.com

Howard O. Godnick (pro hac vice pending)

Joshua R. Schonauer (pro hac vice pending)

SCHULTE ROTH & ZABEL LLP

919 Third Avenue

New York, NY 10022

Tel. (212) 756-2000

Fax (212) 593-5955

Email: howard.godnick@srz.com

Email: joshua.schonauer@srz.com

Attorneys for Defendants Cerberus Capital

Management, L.P., Stephen Feinberg and

Robert Nardelli

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 79 filed 08/01/14 page 3 of 4
4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 1st day of August, 2014, a copy of the foregoing

was filed electronically and has been served on all counsel of record by the Court’s

ECF filing system.

Additionally, a copy of the foregoing was sent to the following pro se Plaintiff

by depositing the same in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid:

Robert Holland

1120 Baker Street

Gary, IN 46404

s/ Mark D. Stuaan

Mark D. Stuaan

INDS01 1468937v1

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM document 79 filed 08/01/14 page 4 of 4