District Court

MEMORANDA AND ORDERS

DECEMBER 15, 2022

BY GOLDBERG, J.

USA v. Womack et al; 13-0206; When I sentenced

Brice, I noted that a significant sentence was necessary, but I also

observed that 168 months, the low end of the guideline� range, would also

be significant.

BY PRATTER, J.

USA v. Hooks; 13-0206; For these reasons, the

Court denies Mr. Hook�s motion for early termination of supervised

release.

BY McHUGH, J.

Cintron v. Luther et al; 18-5537; For these

reasons� I am constrained to deny Cintron�s Petition, and find no basis

for issuing a certificate of appealability.

Gladden v. Ambler Healthcare Group, LLC et al; 21-

4483; For the reasons set forth above, Defendants� Motion for Summary

Judgment will be granted.

BY ROBRENO, J.

DA Silva et al v. Temple University Hospital, Inc.

et al; 20-1395; Defendants have demonstrated that a dismissal with

prejudice for Plaintiffs� failure to prosecute is warranted under Poulis.

BY BAYLSON, J.

Philadelphia Eagles Limited Partnership v. Factory

Mutual Insurance Company; 21-1776; At the conclusion of the argument held

on December 7, 2022, the Court instructed counsel to meet and confer

about an initial discovery program and to submit either a joint proposal

or separate proposals to this Court.

Broder et al v. United States of America; 22-0037;

Judgment will be entered in favor of the Defendant and against the

Plaintiff.

SPF Owner LLC et al v. Hartford Fire Insurance

Company; 22-1333; After both parties submitted proposals to initiate

limited discovery, the Court has determined that at this time discovery

should be limited to exchange of documents by both parties.

BY MARSTON, J.

Widmer et al v. Weltman Weinberg & Reis Co.,

L.P.A.; 22-1323; The Widmers have failed to allege a violation of the

FDCPA, and Weltman�s motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted.

BY SURRICK, J.

Hall v. Septa et al; 22-4759; For the foregoing

reasons, the Court will grant Hall leave to proceed in forma pauperis,

and dismiss his Complaint without prejudice pursuant Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 8 and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. � 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for

failure to state a claim.

BY LEESON, JR, J.

USA v. Culbreath; 17-0341; Culbreath, who does not

allege to suffer from any medical conditions, has completely failed to

provide an extraordinary and compelling reason for his release.

Leisure II v. County of Lancaster County, Penna et

al; 22-4910; For this reason, the Court is constrained to find that

Leisure�s claims are untimely and must be dismissed with prejudice.

BY GALLAGHER, J.

Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund et al

v. York Concrete Company, LLC; 20-5560; Lastly, the undisputed facts

establish that the Waggoner Entities, including YCC, are businesses under

common control and therefore jointly and severally liable for any

withdrawal liability incurred by YCC.