Southern District of New York enters default judgment against Immix Law Group
Case Summary
Star Protection Agency LLC and others sued Immix Law Group PC and others in the Southern District of New York. The court entered a default judgment against the defendants. The specifics of the judgment and the underlying claims are not detailed in the provided summary.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Key Issues
- • Default judgment
- • Legal malpractice
- • Breach of contract
Docket Snapshot
Court
S.D.N.Y.
Southern District of New York · 2nd Circuit · NY
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Active litigation
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
1:26-cv-00650 Spriggs v. United States Postal Service et al
Other · May 01, 2026
Coverage
5 articles
5 sources tracked
Participants
3 Defendants, 1 Government Agency, 3 Plaintiffs, +1 more
8 linked entities
Judge
Not assigned in feed
What the record shows
This case is tied to Southern District of New York, a federal district court in NY.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated May 01, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Soto Limited LP, Immix Law Group PC, United States Postal Service and others.
Press monitoring has found 5 related articles from 5 distinct sources.
The Story So Far
Star Protection Agency LLC et al v. Immix Law Group PC et al is an active civil matter in Southern District of New York under docket 26-cv-00650.
The dispute currently identifies 1:26-cv-00650 Mark Missman, 2:26-cv-00650 Star Protection Agency LLC, and 8:26-cv-00650 Fernando Gastelum on one side and Immix Law Group PC, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, and Soto Limited LP on the other. The case is currently organized around Voluntary dismissal, Star Protection Agency LLC, Immix Law Group PC.
The available docket gives enough signal to track the case, but not enough to overstate the merits. This page will become more useful as filings, orders, hearings, and party appearances add detail.
On May 1, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court has referenced a separate case, 1:26-cv-00650 Spriggs v. United States Postal Service et al, in the ongoing Star Protection Agency LLC et al v. Immix Law Group PC et al case.
This reference is likely to inform the decision-making process in the. On May 1, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court entered judgment. On April 24, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court granted a voluntary dismissal of the case Fernando Gastelum v. Soto Limited LP, case number 8:26-cv-00650, without prejudice. This means the plaintiff can refile the case at a later time. The dismissal was granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil.
On April 23, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The defendant filed their Answer to the Complaint.
The next thing to watch is whether the latest other produces a substantive order, a scheduling change, a settlement signal, or a filing that clarifies the parties' positions.
About This Court
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.) is a federal district court in the 2nd Circuit, NY.
Case Timeline
5 events1:26-cv-00650 Spriggs v. United States Postal Service et al
The court has referenced a separate case, 1:26-cv-00650 Spriggs v. United States Postal Service et al, in the ongoing Star Protection Agency LLC et al v. Immix Law Group PC et al case. This reference is likely to inform the decision-making process in the current case. The exact impact of this reference is unclear at this time.
1:26-cv-00650 Mark Missman v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
The court entered judgment.
8:26-cv-00650 Fernando Gastelum v. Soto Limited LP
The court granted a voluntary dismissal of the case Fernando Gastelum v. Soto Limited LP, case number 8:26-cv-00650, without prejudice. This means the plaintiff can refile the case at a later time. The dismissal was granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).
2:26-cv-00650 Star Protection Agency LLC et al v. Immix Law Group PC et al
The defendant filed their Answer to the Complaint.
1:26-cv-00650 Powell v. USA
The court granted an extension of time for the USA to file an answer or respond to the Powell v. USA case, allowing additional time for the government to prepare its response. This extension is significant because it gives the USA more time to gather evidence and prepare its defense. The extension is for 21 days.
Coverage Timeline
Press Coverage
1:26-cv-00650 Mark Missman v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
Default Judgment ( 22
8:26-cv-00650 Fernando Gastelum v. Soto Limited LP
Voluntary Dismissal of a Case (Pursuant to FRCP 41a (1)) ( 10
2:26-cv-00650 Star Protection Agency LLC et al v. Immix Law Group PC et al
Answer to Complaint ( 12
1:26-cv-00650 Powell v. USA
Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond ( 21
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
5 outlets · 5 articles
Timeline events
5 records on file
Last updated
3 days, 9 hours ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.