Gonzalez-Aviles is DOL's and its allies' latest attempt to reverse BALCA's decision in In the Matter of Island Holdings, No. 2013-PWD-00002 (en banc) (Dec. 3, 2013).  Gonzalez-Aviles is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, the Hon. Marvin Garbis, presiding.  Substantive pleadings, papers, and orders will be posted here as they are served.  

The complete court docket as of March 8, 2016 is here.  The docket will be updated when substantive events take place, but will not be updated when minor procedural events take place.  The party information has been removed as it consumed 12 pages.  

  1. [01] Complaint
  2. [92] Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Moon Nurseries
  3. [93] Order Granting Voluntary Dismissal of Moon Nurseries
  4. [97] Employer-Defendants' Amended Consent Motion For Enlargement Of Time
  5. [101] Order Granting Defendants' Consent Motion For Enlargement Of Time
  6. [103-1] Defendant Valley Crest's Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support Of Motion To Dismiss (the Motion and the proposed Order are here)
  7. [131] DOL Motion To Dismiss (with Memorandum)
  8. [132] Defendant Toll Brothers' Motion to Dismiss
  9. [133] Defendant Valley Crest's Supplemental Memorandum In Support Of Motion To Dismiss
  10. [134] Defendant Degeller Attractions Motion To Dismiss
  11. [136] Employer-Defendants' Motion, Memorandum, and Exhibits In Support Of Motion To Dismiss
  12. [138] Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Interstate Amusements
  13. [139] Order Granting Voluntary Dismissal Of Interstate Amusements
  14. [140] Plaintiffs' Opposition To Defendant Department Of Labor's Motion To Dismiss - Plaintiffs explain why they think they can sue DOL.  [February 18, 2016]
  15. [141] Plaintiffs' Opposition to Employer-Defendants' Motion To Dismiss - Plaintiffs admit that Employer-Defendants did nothing wrong and that the Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over them.  Plaintiffs try to explain why they are allowed to sue Employer-Defendants nonetheless. [February 18, 2016]
  16. [144] Defendant Valley Crest's Reply In Support of Its Motion To Dismiss - Valley Crest continues its own defense.  It still argues that it should be dismissed because Plaintiffs have not asserted a cause of action against it. [March 3, 2016]
  17. [145] Defendant DOL's Reply In Support of its Motion To Dismiss - DOL explains why Plaintiffs cannot sue it over Island Holdings.  DOL walks a fine line between seeking dismissal and opposing Island Holdings.  [March 3, 2016]
  18. [147] Defendant Degeller's Reply In Support of its Motion To Dismiss - This is what lawyers call a "me too" brief.  Degeller adopts Valley Crest's Motion as its own. [March 7, 2016]
  19. [148]  Employer-Defendants' Reply In Support of their Motion To Dismiss - This brief explains in further detail why the Court does not have jurisdiction over Employer-Defendants, DOL, Valley Crest, and Degeller.  It also explains why Plaintiffs' arguments on the merits do not hold water. [March 7, 2016]
  20. [151] Plaintiffs' Motion For Leave To File A Surreply To Employer-Defendants' Reply - This brief asks the Court for permission to file a brief in reply to Employer-Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.  The proposed Surreply is here. [March 11, 2016]