Ortiz v. Rivera Lugo (In re Rivera Lugo), 503 B.R. 13

Creditor Desarrollos Acuarios sought to join the dischargeability adversary as a plaintiff under Rule 20(a).
Debtors filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition on January 18, 2013 and listed their schedules.
Plaintiffs and Desarrollos Acuarios initially sought a 30-day extension to file dischargeability complaints, granted until May 27, 2013.
The Plaintiffs filed the dischargeability complaint on June 7, 2013; Desarrollos Acuarios moved to join on June 11, 2013, which the court denied without prejudice on June 14, 2013.
Desarrollos Acuarios then filed a Motion for Joinder in the adversary proceeding on June 20, 2013; Defendants opposed.
The court denied the Motion for Joinder, concluding Rule 20 is inapplicable to a non-party and the motion was untimely under Rule 4007(c).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May Desarrollos Acuarios join under Rule 20(a)?	Acuarios asserts same transaction/occurrence and common questions.	Nonparties cannot join under Rule 20; Acuarios is not a plaintiff or defendant.	Denied; Rule 20 applies to parties, not nonparties.
Is the joinder motion timely under Rule 4007(c)?	Extension granted to all creditors should allow joinder.	Late filing cannot piggyback on extensions; untimely.	Denied; motion untimely under 4007(c).

Premier Foods of Bruton, Inc. v. City of Orlando, 192 F.R.D. 310 (M.D. Fla. 2000) (nonparties cannot be joined under 20; intervention rules apply for outsiders)
In re Wexler, 477 B.R. 709 (Bankr.N.D. Ill. 2012) (courts rebuff late efforts to intervene in dischargeability adversaries)
In re Zyndorf, 44 B.R. 77 (Bankr.N.D. Ohio 1984) (creditor denied joining plaintiffs when deadlines missed)
In re Donovan, 411 B.R. 756 (Bankr.S.D. Fla. 2009) (late filings cannot be cured by joining an ongoing proceeding)
Barzingus v. Wilheim, 306 F.3d 17 (10th Cir. 2010) (joinder standards related to arbitration/related contexts)