District Court

MEMORANDA AND ORDERS

FEBRUARY 21, 2024

BY SANCHEZ, J.

USA v. Cedres; 12-0431; Rather, he asserts his �predicate crime fell under � 924(c)(3)�s residual clause, which is now void for vagueness.�

USA v. McBride; 12-0685; The Third Circuit addressed this issue in United States v. Stoney, holding �a completed Hobbs Act robbery requires proof of �the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force�� and is thus �categorically a crime of violence under 924(c)(3)(A).�

BY DIAMOND, J.

USA v. Rosado et al; 18-0180; Accordingly, I will deny his Rule 29(c) Motion.

BY BEETLESTONE, J.

Burns v. Seaworld Parks & Entertainment, Inc., et al; 22-2941; For the foregoing reasons, SeaWorld�s Motion to Strike will be granted in part and denied in part.

BY SCOTT, J.

Schabacker et al v. Ferens; 22-3778; Because Mr. Ferens� Glassdoor.com post was not commercial speech as defined under the Lanham Act, summary judgment will be granted as to that claim.

BY PAPPERT, J.

D. et al v. UHS of Doylestown, LLC et al; 23-2097; At oral argument, the Court informed Delphine the second amended complaint was her final opportunity to amend.

BY GALLAGHER, J.

Harrison-El v. 1 John Doe Officer et al; 23-4364; For the foregoing reasons, the Court will grant Harrison-El leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

BY KEARNEY, J.

Curdo v. County of Chester et al; 24-0132; Pretrial detainee Samuel Curdo asks we order the Facility and its medical provider to immediately provide better dental care for his dental pain.

BY PRATTER, J.

Valentin v. Commonwealth of pa. et al; 24-0629; For the foregoing reasons, the Court dismisses Mr. Valentin�s Title VII and PHRA claims against �Deputy Chief Council� with prejudice and the claims against the other defendants without prejudice.

FEBRUARY 22, 2024

BY SCHMEHL, J.

Burk et al v. Wellpath et al; 23-4233; For the foregoing reasons, the Court will dismiss Moragne and Pickett�s Complaint because their claims are not plausible as pled.

BY WOLSON, J.

Rivera v. Transunion LLC; 24-0333; Ms. Rivera�s Complaint falls short of providing sufficient factual allegations to state a plausible claim.

Marquis v. Mandillo et al; 24-0426; I will grant Ms. Marquis�s request to proceed in forma pauperis, but I will dismiss her Complaint.

FEBRUARY 23, 2024

BY LEESON, JR, J.

Burke v. Steberger et al; 22-3464; Further, because Burke�s challenges to the conditions of his confinement do not amount to a constitutional violation, Count III�s Fourteenth Amendment claim is also dismissed, without prejudice.