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 ina 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.