District Court
MEMORANDA AND ORDERS
DECEMBER 8, 2022
BY SANCHEZ, J.
USA v. Carter; 19-0078; However, a sentencing
court may not impose two obstruction-of-justice enhancements for
two
separate incidents of obstruction.
USA v. Davis, et. al.; 19-0636; . Davis� motion
will therefore be denied.
BY BRODY, J.
In Re: Wirecard Ag Securities
Litigation; 20-3326;
I will grant EY Germany�s motion to dismiss for lack of personal
jurisdiction.
BY HEY, J.
Grant v. Saul; 21-2122; Finally, on remand,
Defendant shall also reconsider the evidence regarding
manipulative
limitations and obtain additional vocational testimony if
necessary.
BY GOLDBERG, J.
Martha Snider, as Attorney in Fact for Isadore
Goldhirsh v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company;
21-4224; In light of
the foregoing, I will deny Defendant�s Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff�s bad
faith claim and to Strike paragraph twenty-seven of the Amended
Complaint.
BY KEARNEY, J.
Carroll, Jr. v. George W. Hill Correctional
Facility et al; 22-1720; We dismiss Mr. Carroll�s consolidated
allegations in his Complaint.
BY PRATTER, J.
Gedeon v. The Attorney General et al; 22-3595;
For
the foregoing reasons, Mr. Gedeon�s
individual capacity claims against
Defendants R. Kistler and Dr. Dalmasi for delay in treating his allergy
symptoms and his individual capacity claims against Defendants Mendek and
Flannary for placing him in� a cell with no access to drinking water will
be served for a responsive pleading.
BY MARSTON, J.
Talley v. Savage et al; 22-4186; For the foregoing
reasons, the Court will dismiss Talley�s Complaint in its entirety
as
legally frivolous and for failure to state a claim, pursuant to 28
U.S.C.
� 1915A(b)(1), and deny his Motion to Proceed in forma Pauperis as moot.
BY YOUNGE, J.
Saultz v. Attorney Generl
Josh Shapiro, et al.;
19-5778; For the reasons discussed above, the Court will grant
Defendants� Motion for Summary Judgment.
BY SMITH, J.
Zurich American Insurance Company v. Gutowski;
22-
2834; Accordingly, the court will grant the motion for a default
judgment
and enter a declaration that Zurich has no duty to defend or
indemnify
Gutowski in the Noble action.
DECEMBER 9, 2022
BY PADOVA, J.
Gardner v. Septa; 20-6045; For the foregoing
reasons, we grant Defendant�s Motion for Summary Judgment and
Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment in their entirety, and we
enter
judgment in Defendant�s favor on all of Plaintiff�s remaining
claims.
BY HEY, J.
Karelis v. Saul; 21-1672; Therefore, I will grant
Plaintiff�s Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment only to the
extent that
the Judgment is vacated, and I will grant Defendant�s uncontested
motion
for remand.
BY PAPPERT, J.
Subher v. City of Philadelphia et al; 22-0601;
Subher has now amended his original Complaint
three times and does not
seek leave to do so again.
BY WHITNEY, J.
W.M. Barr & Company, Inc. v. Dumond,
Inc.; 22-
4916; In so ruling, the Court declines to rule on the pending Motion
for
Preliminary Injunction and directs the Clerk of Court to terminate
the
hearing scheduled for Monday, December 12, 2022.
BY KENNEY, J.
Dinkins, Jr. v. Mason et al; 21-2916; Therefore,
his Motion must be construed as an unauthorized second or
successive
habeas petition to the extent that he is challenging his judgment
of
sentence.
BY LEESON, JR, J.
Stoudt et al v. BCA Industries et al; 22-1900;
Accordingly, Plaintiffs are granted leave to amend their
Complaint.