Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 01-3767 SECTION "N"
April 30, 2002
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are two motions filed by claimant, Phillip 0. Burnson, Jr.: (1) Motion to Modify Injunction to Lift Stay; and (2) Motion to Reduce the Deadline within which to File Claims. For the reasons that follow, both motions are DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
On December 17, 2001, O'Meara, Inc. filed this action seeking exoneration from and/or limitation of liability arising out of the October 22, 2000 voyage of the W/V Chief. This Court, by Judge Berrigan's Order of December 17, 2001, required that notice be published announcing June 28, 2002 as the deadline for filing claims in this matter. Such notice was published in December 2001 and January 2002, as required by Supplemental Rule F(4). (Rec. Doc. 32, Exh. B). Phillip Burnson filed a claim on January 16, 2002 and simultaneously therewith, filed the instant motion to lift stay. When O'Meara opposed the motion on grounds of prematurity, Burnson filed the instant motion to reduce the June 28, 2002 deadline.
II. LAW AND ANALYSIS
The notice procedure of Supplemental Rule F(4) is not discretionary. This rule provides that the Court " shall issue a notice" advising of the deadline for filing claims, that the deadline " shall not be less that 30 days after issuance of the notice," and that the notice " shall be published in . . . newspapers . . . once a week for four successive weeks." Fed R. Civ. P. Supp. Rule F(4) (emphasis added). Because the deadline here has not expired, the instant motion to lift stay is "procedurally flawed." Cal Dive Int'l, Inc. v. Johnson, 2001 WL 604170 at *1 (E.D. La. May 31, 2001) (Clement, J.). Movant has cited no case in which a court lifted the stay before the deadline for filing claims had passed. Nor has movant cited law authorizing the Court to alter the published deadline as movant requests, in total disregard of the mandatory notice procedure of Rule F(4). Thus, while movant's arguments regarding illusory potential claimants might be well taken if made after the deadline for filing claims has passed, they are premature at this time.
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Modify Injunction to Lift Stay filed by claimant, Phillip O. Burnson, Jr., and the Motion to Reduce the Deadline within which to File Claims filed by claimant, Phillip O. Burnson, Jr. are DENIED.