MEMORANDA AND ORDERS

FEBRUARY 1, 2024

BY SURRICK, J.

Hidalgo Villafane et al v. Agustawestland Phildelphia Corporation et al; 20-6393; For the foregoing reasons, Defendants� Motion to Dismiss is granted on the grounds of forum non conveniens.

BY PAPPERT, J.

Connor v. Unisys Corporation et al; 22-4529; The Court dismisses Connor�s claims without prejudice.

BY SANCHEZ, J.

Payne v. Mansion at Bala; 23-3408; Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) requires the Court to �freely give leave� to amend �when justice so requires.� Because it is possible Payne could plead additional facts to support a claim for retaliation under 3617, the Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice.

BY KENNEY, J.

Roach v. JPmorgan Chase Bank, N.A.; 24-0059; For the foregoing reasons, the Court will dismiss Roach�s Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without prejudice to him refiling his claim in an appropriate state court if he chooses to do so.

BY PRATTER, J.

City of Philadelphia v. Bradley et al; 24-0269; For the foregoing reasons, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this action in any fashion.

FEBRUARY 2, 2024

BY SURRICK, J.

Hidalgo Villafane et al v. Agustawestland Phildelphia Corporation et al; 20-6393; For the foregoing reasons, Defendants� Motion to Dismiss is granted on the grounds of forum non conveniens.

BY McHUGH, J.

Eastmond v. Galkin et al; 21-5280; For the reasons set forth, Defendants� Motion for Summary Judgment is granted as to all counts except the FMLA interference claim.

BY BAYLSON, J.

Paparo v. Borough of Yeadon et al; 22-0841; For the foregoing reasons, both the Borough�s and Individual Defendants� motions for summary judgment are denied.

Donahue et al v. Borough of Collingdale et al; 22-1695; For the foregoing reasons, Defendants� motions for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.

Apache Industrial United, Inc. v. Lichterman et al; 23-4096; For the foregoing reasons, Defendants motions to dismiss are denied.

BY PAPPERT, J.

Connor v. Unisys Corporation et al; 22-4529; The Court dismisses Connor�s claims without prejudice.

Bennett v. Septa et al; 23-1271; The few employees who were still able to telework were allowed to do so because they had ADA accommodations which Bennett did not.

City of Philadelphia v. Bradley et al; 24-0015; For the foregoing reasons, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this action in any fashion.

BY SANCHEZ, J.

Payne v. Mansion at Bala; 23-3408; Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) requires the Court to �freely give leave� to amend �when justice so requires.� Because it is possible Payne could plead additional facts to support a claim for retaliation under 3617, the Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice.

BY KENNEY, J.

Roach v. JPmorgan Chase Bank, N.A.; 24-0059; For the foregoing reasons, the Court will dismiss Roach�s Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without prejudice to him refiling his claim in an appropriate state court if he chooses to do so.

BY PRATTER, J.

City of Philadelphia v. Bradley et al; 24-0116; For the foregoing reasons, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this action in any fashion.

City of Philadelphia v. Bradley et al; 24-0269; For the foregoing reasons, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this action in any fashion.