Replies to post #11425 on Cafe Serendipity Holdings Inc. (CAFS)

[Notthe2]

I've seen this multiple times, the Judge still has to hear SSM and why it should be theirs. Defendants were clearly not present. If they were, the Judge would have asked for their names and put it in the docket.Its 100% not contested, I'm fairly certain it was a schedule interference.

[Quilmes]

The judge for $NTFS and $CAFS were TWO different judges and $NTFS hearing started late so SSM lawyer couldn’t made it on time to be in front of judge for $CAFS.... also it was noticed that from $CAFS side no one showed up at all.
New court hearing date is now June 15th Tuesday at 9:00 AM per new docket info.