Court of Appeals

OPINIONS FILED

AUGUST 21, 2024

BY SCIRICA, J.

John Kalu v. Spaulding; 23-1103; we affirm the orders of the District Court.

BY PORTER, J.

USA v. Joseph Johnson, Jr.; 22-1970; we affirm the orders of the District Court.

NOT PRECEDENTIAL OPINIONS FILED

AUGUST 21, 2024

BY ROTH, J.

Sharon Finizie v. Secretary United States Department of Veterans Aff; 23-2594; judgment of the district court affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Vivian Martin v. Boeing Co; 23-1614; judgment of the district court affirmed.

BY SMITH, J.

USA v. Roderick King; 22-3095; judgment of the district court affirmed.

District Court

MEMORANDA AND ORDERS

AUGUST 20, 2024

BY BARTLE, J.

Kelly et al v. J&J Service Solutions LLC; 23-2854; The court will approve the settlement in its entirety and will enter an order to this effect.

BY PAPPERT, J.

Parker v. Lee et al; 23-3999; Parker received an opportunity to cure the defects in his Second Amended Complaint.

BY QUI�ONES ALEJANDRO, J.

Jones v. Northern Children�s Services; 23-4349; The reasons set forth, Defendant�s partial motion to dismiss is granted, in part, as to the defamation claim premised on the statement that Plaintiff was �lazy.� (Count VII).

BY LEESON, JR., J.

Prikis et al v. Maxatawny Township et al; 23-3901; The remaining counts- for declaratory relief and private inurement- are not viable causes of action and are dismissed with prejudice. Since all claims are dismissed, Plaintiffs� Motion for Preliminary Peremptory Judgment and Mandamus is also dismissed and denied.

Deeck v. Singer et al; 24-1929; This Court lacks jurisdiction over the instant case, and for the reasons articulated above, Defendants� motion to dismiss is granted. Any attempt to amend the Complaint would be futile and therefore leave to do so will not be granted.

AUGUST 19, 2024

BY MARSTON, J.

Whitaker v. Yeadon Township Police Department et al; 23-2854; The foregoing reasons, the Court will grant Whitaker leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss his complaint. To the extent Whitaker�s pursues claims that are not cognizable, they are dismissed without prejudice so that Whitaker can challenge his conviction in a habeas proceeding and file a new civil rights complaint in the event his conviction is reversed, vacated, or otherwise invalidated.