Court Cases
| Most Popular Cases |  |
Cases with Faces | |
Cases by Type |  |
Cases by Reporter |  |
Cases by Year |  |
All Reporters → us-dist-lexis → Volume 2013
Opinions in us-dist-lexis Volume 2013
ORDER
This is an action for wrongful foreclosure. It is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 29] of the Magistrate Judge that the Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Amended Complaint *1336[Doc. 16 & 20] be GRANTED. The Plaintiffs Objections are without merit for the reasons set forth in the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation. The Court approves and adopts the Re...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM — DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On May 17, 2012, plaintiffs Gordon Casey (“Casey”) and Duane Skinner (“Skinner”) (collectively “plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, filed this class action lawsuit against defendants Citibank, N.A. (“Citibank”); CitiMortgage, Inc. (“CitiMortgage”); and Citigroup, Inc. (collectively “the Citi defendants”) 1; MidFirs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
The instant action arises from a patent dispute between Micron Technology, Inc., Micron Electronics, Inc., and Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc. (collectively, “Micron”) and Rambus Inc. (“Rambus”) over Micron’s alleged infringement of twelve Rambus patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,915,-105; 5,953,263; 5,954,804; 5,995,443; 6,032,214; 6,032,215; 6,034,918; 6,038,195...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Defendants, the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and the Fish and Wildlife Service (together “FWS”), have filed a Rule 60(b)(5) motion to partially vacate the Court’s April 5, 2012, Order. They argue that subsequent events have rendered prospective application of the order inequitable. For the reasons explained below, the Court will deny the motion.
The fac...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
DEONTE SPICER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 10-1576 (B...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE IN ITS ENTIRETY (Doc. 15); (2) REVERSING THE COMMISSIONER’S DECISION THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT DISABLED; (3) REMANDING FOR AN IMMEDIATE AWARD OF BENEFITS; (4) DENYING COMMISSIONER’S MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY REMAND (DOC. 10); AND (5) TERMINATING THIS CASE
Plaintiff Elizabeth Inman commenced action in this Court pursua...
Views: 0
Page 236
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Schneider National Carrier, Inc.’s (“Schneider”) Motion to Strike Expert [37]; Schneider’s Motion to Declare Lease Agreement and Amendments Ambiguous, to Declare Enniss’s Interpretation as Unreasonable and to Declare Penalties Unenforceable (“Motion to Declare”) [38];1 Plaintiff Enniss Family Realty I, LLC’s (“Enniss”) Da...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Defendants move for summary judgment on the issue of individual causation. For the following reasons, the Court grants defendants’ motion.
1. BACKGROUND
At Tuboscope Veteo International, LP, Clarence Hill handled pipes that became clogged during oil production. The build up in the pipes, known as scale, can be radioactive, and Clarence Hill alleges that he was exposed to radio...
Views: 0
ORDER and JUDGMENT
This case was tried to the Court on September 20-21, 24-25, 27-29, 2012 with final arguments given on November 29, 2012.
Background
Cellport Systems, Inc. (“Cellport”), a Colorado corporation, designs and develops technology that enables mobile phones to be connected to the audio, power and antenna systems of vehicles on a hands-free basis. Peiker Acustic GMGH & Co.KG (“Peiker”...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In June 2012, the parties consented to my deciding summary judgment motions concerning whether defendants the City of New York (the “City”), New York City Human Resources Administration (“HRA”), and Verna Eggleston as HRA Commissioner (together, “City Defendants”) are plaintiffs’ joint employer. ECF Nos. 276, 281. Now before me are the (i) City Defendants’ motion for summar...
Views: 0
Opinion and Order
This case arises out of a massive fraud at Satyam Computer Services Ltd. (“Satyam” or the “Company”), involving thousands of forged invoices, business contracts-and bank statements, dual sets of account books, and SEC .filings overstating the Company’s assets by a total of more than $1 billion. Before the Court are motions to dismiss two related complaints. The first is a cons...
Views: 0
ORDER
On November 18, 2010, Abraham Mir-man (“plaintiff’ or “Mirman”) commenced this diversity action against Robert Feiner (“defendant” or “Feiner”) alleging breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and promissory estoppel. In response, Feiner moved to dismiss, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), 12(b)(3), and 12(b)(6). By Memorandum & Order dated September 28, 2012, the Court granted def...
Views: 0
ORDER:
(1) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT; AND
(2) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
(Doc. No. 76).
Presently before the Court are Defendant Chad Hagobian’s (“Defendant” or “Hagobian”) motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Third Amended Complaint and motion for sanctions pursuant to Rule 11. (Doc. No. 76.) Plaintiff filed a response in opposition o...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on October 31, 2012. Plaintiff appeared by its counsel David R. Eberhart and David J. Sepanik, and defendant appeared by its counsel Martin R. Glick and Daniel B. Asimow. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Lisa Koker brings this action against Aurora Loan Servicing, LLC (“Aurora”), Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems, Inc. (“MERS”), James E. Clarke, and Atlantic Law Group, LLC (“Atlantic Law”), asserting claims for wrongful foreclosure and unlawful trade practices in violation of District of Columbia and federal law. See Verified Complaint for Injunctive Relief,...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Lena T. Konah, a United States citizen and native of Liberia, worked as a licensed practical nurse for Defendant Unity Health Care, Inc. She was assigned to the medical unit at the Central Detention Facility operated by Defendant District of Columbia. She complains that jail inmates made vulgar and lewd comments and gestures at the nurses constantly. Ms. Konah further complains ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Ronald Solomon (“Plaintiff’ or “Mr. Solomon”) brings the instant suit against Defendants, Bristol Myers-Squibb Company (“BMS”), Sanofi-Aventis U.S., L.L.C., Sanofi-Aventis U.S., Inc., and Sanofi-Synthelabo, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging that he suffered injuries as a result of Defendants’ design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on a motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 7) filed- by Defendant Hilda L. Solis, Secretary of the United States Department of Labor (“Sec*35retary”). The Secretary moves to dismiss the claim under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), arguing that this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction or, in the alternative, Plaintiff Norfolk Southe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiffs, former employees of the ESPN- Zone restaurant at the Baltimore *728Inner Harbor, have brought this action against defendants The Walt Disney Company and-its subsidiary, Zone Enterprises, alleging that, as their employers, the defendants violated the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (“WARN”) Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq., when the restaurant was shuttered....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Pedro Edenilson Munoz filed a collective action complaint seeking to recover damages from his former employer, Defendant Big Valley, Inc., for purported violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., and the District of Columbia Minimum Wage Act Revision Act (“D.C. Minimum Wage Act”), D.C. Code §§ 32-1001 et seq. See generally Compl., E...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendants Advanced Biological Laboratories, SA and ABL Patent Licensing Technologies, SARL (collectively “ABL”) have filed a Motion for Reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), see ECF No. 67, requesting that this Court reconsider its Order granting summary judgment of patent, invalidity in favor of Plaintiff SmartGene, Inc. For the reasons explained belo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Gary Volpe, Matthew Sarter, Wayne Resnick, George Roa, Angelo Muro, Michael Spae, the estate of Steven Doran, Thomas Guiry, David Cullen III, Alfred Thursland, Richard Blanc, Gregory Bartow, Paul Radzewsky, John Russ, Michael Mirenda, Joseph Sperber, John Hoffman, Gerald Houck III, Christopher Brandimarte, Paul Klecka, Richard Gotterbarn, Matthew Love, Joseph Barto...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Town of Orangetown, New York (the “Town”), Town of Orange-town Police Department (“OPD”), Kevin Nulty, James Nawoichyk, Thomas Hoffman and “John” Sullivan (“Defendants”) bring this Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint in its entirety pursu*412ant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).1 Doe. 33. Also before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Defendants to identify...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This contested matter stems from the bankruptcy of Sea Island Company (“Debtor”), a luxury resort on Georgia’s coast. Dennie McCrary — an unsecured creditor of Sea Island — objected to a motion by the Liquidation Trustee (“Trustee”) for an extension of the claims objection deadline and for related relief. The bankruptcy court overruled McCrary’s objection and granted the m...
Views: 0
Opinion and Order
Kisshia Simmons-Grant (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against her former *500employer, the law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP (“Quinn” or “Defendant”), asserting claims for race discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., 42 U.S.C. § 1981a; the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296; and the Ne...
Views: 0
*1047ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs Park Townsend, LLC (“Park Townsend”), GKB Development Co., LLC, Warren L. Breslow Trust, and Warren L. Breslow (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this insurance coverage action against Clarendon America Insurance Company (“Clarendon”) and Does 1 through 500 (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is an employment discrimination action. It is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 71] of the Magistrate Judge recommending that the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 53] be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. For the reasons set forth in the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, there is a genuine issue of fact as to whether the Plainti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants Pharmaceutical Technologies, Inc. (“PTI”) and Douglas M. Pick’s (“Pick”) Motion to Compel Arbitration, filed June 15, 2012 (Dkt. No. 12), and Defendant Angela Pieper’s (“Pieper”) Motion to Compel Arbitration, filed December 5, 2012 (Dkt. No. 76). The Court having considered the same finds *721that both motions should be DENIED for the...
Views: 0
*858MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a negligence action filed against the United States of America (the “Government”) by a group of plaintiffs who allege that the Government failed to properly maintain and/or forward a form designating the plaintiffs as beneficiaries on a life insurance policy, causing them to lose insurance benefits to which they otherwise would otherwise have been entitled...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Institutional investors King County, Washington (“King County”) and Iowa Student Loan Liquidity Corporation (“ISL”) bring this action to recover losses stemming from the October, 2007 collapse of Rhinebridge, a structured investment vehicle (“SIV”). Plaintiffs assert claims of common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and aiding and abetting fraud against:...
Views: 0
OPINION
Pro se plaintiff Jeffrey Cottrell alleges that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) discriminated against him in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Age Discrimination in Federal Programs Act, failed to investigate his civil rights complaints in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, violated the Privacy Act, and denied him procedural due process. USDA moves...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Abrams, Fensterman, Fensterman, Eisman, Greenberg, Formato & Einiger, LLP (the “Abrams Firm”) brings this action against defendant Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London (“Lloyd’s”) for, inter alia, a declaration that Lloyd’s is obligated to defend and (potentially) indemnify the Abrams Firm in certain underlying actions against the firm pursuant to a professional liabil...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Motion of the United States of America to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Document 4) and supporting memorandum (Document 5), Plaintiffs response in opposition (Document 8) and Defendant’s reply (Document 9), together with Plaintiffs Petition (Document 1). After careful review, the Court grants Defendant’s motion.
I. FACTUA...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses (Dkt. # 79, # 80). After considering the relevant pleadings, the Court finds that the motion should be granted in part.
The Court may award reasonable attorneys’ fees for any “successful action” to enforce liability un...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Sentinel Management Group, Inc. (“Sentinel”) filed under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in August 2007. In September 2008, Plaintiff Liquidation Trustee filed adversary proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois for avoidance and recovery of pre and post-petition transfers made by Sentinel to or for the benefit of ce...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order Equipment Acquisition Resources went bankrupt and eventually filed, in an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy, a first amended complaint seeking recovery of money that the company made to cover tax liabilities of its shareholders. The United States of America, on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service, moved to dismiss one of the counts (Count 4) that sought recovery of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The foreclosure crisis that has plagued the nation for more than five years has generated a large number of filings in the federal courts. The usual procedural path of these cases is that the plaintiff files an action in state court challenging a threatened or actual foreclosure, and the out-of-state lender then removes the case to federal court. Diversity of citizenship is...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff National Trust Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs Complaint and Defendant Len-Verandahs’ Counterclaim (Doc. # 99), filed on September 14, 2012. Len-Verandahs filed a response in opposition to the motion (Doc. # 115) on September 29, 2012. Also before the Court is Len-Verandahs’ Motion for Summary Judgment Agai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Jerry Morris, accuses six municipal law enforcement officers of violating his federal- and state-law rights while investigating a 911 telephone call.1 Dur*1250ing the course of the investigation, plaintiff was arrested for punching an officer who refused to leave his home.2 As a result of the incident, plaintiff was indicted by a state-court grand jury on t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case involves claims brought by Anita Russell, the representative of Daniel Russell, against Deputy Denney Wright and TASER International, Inc. The claims against Wright are for the use of excessive force in violation of the United States Constitution, state law claims for gross negligence and assault and battery, and a claim seeking punitive damages. The claims against ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Century Mortgage Company’s (d/ b/a Century Lending Company) (“Century”) motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and the motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by Defendants Landstar Title, LLC(“Landstar”) and Prominent Title Agency, LLC (“Prominent”) Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). (ECF Nos. 28, 33.) Both motions ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case was commenced in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Suffolk, on or about February 7, 2012. The Plaintiff, a supervisory-level United States Postal Service (“USPS”) employee, seeks damages arising from alleged defamatory statements made by the Defendant Norma Herbst, a USPS clerk, to USPS management, concerning the Plaintiffs work habits and the manner in which h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion of the Plaintiff KenAmerican Resources, Inc. (“KenAmerican”) to stay this matter in this Court and compel arbitration as provided in the contract between the parties. [Record No. 8]. Defendant Potter Grandchildren, L.L.C. (“Potter”) timely objected [Record No. 11] and Ken-American filed a Reply [Record No. 12], and this ma...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiffs are three nonprofit environmental groups who allege that defendants U.S. Forest Service (“Forest Service”), Susan Skalski and Randy Moore violated the National Environmental Protection Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 500 et seq., the Forest Service’s Travel Management Rule (“TMR”), 36 C.F.R. § 212.55, and Executive Or...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Kenneth A. Wingle seeks suppression of evidence obtained by the police from his vehicle after a traffic stop that followed Defendant’s vehicle swerving and nearly colliding with a police vehicle that was travelling in the adjacent lane. The police officer stopped Defendant’s vehicle, believing that the swerving resulted from Defendant texting while he was driving. Af...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. Introduction
This case arises from a 2005 deal between Rathbun and IndyMac Bank (“Indy-Mac”) establishing for Rathbun a home equity line of credit based on his ownership of property in Ravalli County. (Doc. *117630 at 2-5.) Rathbun claims that IndyMac wrongfully encumbered two lots of his property (Lots 20 and 21), when he agreed only to encumbering one lot (Lot 20). (Id.) IndyMac has si...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is an appeal from a decision of the Bankruptcy Court in this case. Lee Roy Joyner, M.D. is an unsecured creditor in a Chapter 7 proceeding involving the defendants, Samuel F. Liprie (“Liprie”), S.F.L. & S.I.L., LLC, (“SFL”) Deutsche Bank Florida, N.A. (“Deutsche Bank”), Shawn Bray Liprie Inter Vivos Trust No. 1 (“Liprie Trust”), Wilma D. Liprie, Jon C. Liprie ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On March 17, 2011, a grand jury returned an indictment against defendant Alejandro Figueroa-Lugo (“defendant Figueroa”). (Docket No. 1.) The indictment charged him with one count of knowingly possessing images and movie files containing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). Id. The indictment also contains a forfeiture allegation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 22...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiff Bridget Quinlan alleges that her former employer, Defendant Elysian Hotel, fired her in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k)1 Quinlan also claims that Elysian Hotel interfered with her rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. § 260...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOVANT CARE-SOURCE MANAGEMENT GROUP’S MOTION TO QUASH (DOC. 1)
This matter is now before the Court upon a motion to quash a subpoena filed by Care-Source Management Group (“CareSouree”). CareSource challenges a subpoena issued by Sagebrush Solutions, LLC (“Sagebrush”), the plaintiff in a lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas ...
Views: 0
OPINION This matter is before the court on the Government’s Motion to Disqualify Attor*604ney Jonathan Crisp Based Upon an Unwaivable Conflict of Interest (“Motion to Disqualify”). INTRODUCTION As the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has stated, a motion to disqualify counsel presents the court with “an unenviable choice ... a daunting dilemma” in which the court must weig...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas and Western Missouri brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for redress of alleged violations of its members’ constitutional rights by Defendant Sally Praeger’s enforcement of Kansas House Bill 2075, codified as Kan. Stat. Ann. § 40-2,190 (“the Act”). The Act prohibits insurance companies from offering comprehensi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MADURA A. MARTIN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. 12-0650 (ABJ)
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on motions to dismiss filed by all five defendants. (Docs. 17, 19). The parties have filed briefs in support of their respective positions, (Docs. 18, 20, 26, 27), and the motions are ripe for resolution.
BACKGROUND
According to the amended complaint, (Doc. 16), Sheriff Richard Bates offered the plaintiff employment as chief deputy. The plaintiff advised Sher...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
NARDYNE JEFFERIES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Government has made pretrial motions for the admissibility of certain recorded jailhouse telephone conversations and for the testimony of a confidential source. All of which is to be used against Defendants in this case. The Court referred the matter to the Magistrate Judge who has produced a comprehensive seventy-four (74) page report and recommendation addressin...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Based upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge *891Leo I. Brisbois, and after an independent review of the files, records and proceedings in the above-entitled matter, IT IS ORDERED: That Defendant’s motions to suppress evidence and statements [Docket Nos. 20 and 21] are denied. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter came before t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CONSERVATION FORCE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 10-1057 (JDB)
KENNETH SALAZAR, in his official
capacity as Secretary of the United States
Department of the Interior, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant, Delta Air Lines, Inc., moves the court to dismiss Mark Benedetto’s complaint in its entirety. Docket 11. Benedetto alleges claims for negligence, breach of contract, breach of a duty of good faith and fair dealing, and punitive damages. Docket 1-1. Delta argues that Benedetto’s claims for negligence and breach of ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Slimmarie Perrywatson was a flight attendant with United Airlines from 1978 until she was fired on May 18, 2007 for her conduct towards passengers on a United flight on which she was working. She appealed her termination, along with earlier disciplinary actions, through her union — the Association of Flight Attendants (“AFA”) — before an arbitration panel. The hearin...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RICHARD SOLAND,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 10-cv-2034 (RLW)
v.
THE GEORGE WASHINGTON
UNIVERSITY, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Prof...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration and, in the Alternative, for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 44) and on a Motion to Intervene (Doc. 46), filed by former employees of Schmidt Builders Supply, Inc. For the reasons explained in detail below, both motions are granted in part and denied in part. The Court grants leave to amend as ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Amend Answer (Docket Entry 29) and Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Discovery Schedule (Docket Entry 32). For the reasons that follow, the Court will deny Defendant’s Motion to Amend Answer and will deny Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Discovery Schedule, except as to the request for an extension of the mediátion deadli...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s “Motion in Limine” (Doc. No. *55420). Defendant’s motion seeks to preclude the Government from introducing certain evidence, including: (1) evidence that Defendant possessed firearms on October 14, 2011; that said firearms traveled in interstate commerce; or that Defendant signed the ATF Form 4473 at issue; (2) evidence outside Defendant’s prior...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
I. Introduction
Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment in an insurance coverage dispute arising out of a state court lawsuit brought by a homeowners’ association against the real estate developer, the general contractor, and various subcontractors involved in a construction project of condominiums located in Baldwin County, Alabama. Plaintiff Canal In...
Views: 0
*911ORDER Plaintiff Target Corp. brought an action against defendant Ml Jersey Janitorial Service, Inc., claiming that Ml Jersey failed to indemnify Target under a contractual indemnification provision for expenses arising out of the performance of Ml Jersey’s services. The case is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the Court denie...
Views: 0
Page 2054
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant Swissport Fueling, Inc.’s (“Swissport”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 239.) Also pending are the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (the “EEOC”) Motion to Strike (Doc. 279) and Motion for Leave to File Surreply (Doc. 280). For the reasons discussed below, Swissport’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in part and denied in part. The EEOC...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE # 99), filed May 11, 2012, and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (DE # 101), also filed May 11, 2012. Therein, Plaintiff Jennifer A. Stephens, as personal representative of the Estate of Charles Eugene Becker and as Assignee of Anchorage Homes LLC, (“Plaintiff’ or “St...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs DG Cogen Partners, LLC (“DG Cogen”) and 1211658 Alberta LTD (“Alberta”) bring this legal malpractice action against defendants Lane Powell PC and Jonathan Norling, one of its former attorneys. Defendants move for partial summary judgment, making seven separate arguments on a variety of issues.1 I grant the motion in part and deny it as moot in part. After defendants fil...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The defendants have made an application to the Court to dismiss the plaintiffs case with prejudice for failure to comply with this Court’s Order to pay the filing fee for the case. The plaintiff argues that he has already paid the fee. The defendants’ application is granted in part.
The plaintiff pro se filed the Complaint and Request to Proceed in forma pauperis (“...
Views: 0
Page 2187
ORDER
This declaratory judgment action, seeking declaration of invalidity or non-infringement of two patents, is before the court on the following motions:
1. The defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or, alternatively, to transfer to the Central District of California [Doc. No. 7];
*13682. The plaintiffs motion to conduct jurisdictional discovery [Doc. No. 12];
3. The...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 21, 2012, the day this case was filed, Plaintiff U.S. D.I.D. Corporation (“U.S. D.I.D.”) obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order (“TRO”) barring Defendant Windstream Communications, *503Inc. (“Windstream”) from terminating its telecommunications services. Pursuant to Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, U.S. D.I.D. was required to post security i...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This securities fraud action hinges on the presence of an agency relationship between a broker-dealer and its corporate parent. Plaintiff Elbit Systems Ltd. has sued defendant Credit Suisse Group (“CSG”) for securities fraud, aiding and abetting common law fraud, and unjust enrichment. Elbit seeks to hold CSG liable for the conduct of two brokers at its subsidiary, Credit Suisse...
Views: 0
Page 2207
OPINION AND ORDER
“This case presents the familiar conflict between the legal principle of non-discrimination and the political principle of not-in-my-backyard.” New Directions Treatment Servs. v. City of Reading, 490 F.3d 293, 295 (3d Cir.2007). Plaintiffs challenge certain zoning and environmental ordinances enacted by Defendant Village of Pomona, asserting that the ordinances are unlawful un...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
Now before the Court is the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 43). The motion is fully briefed and I have carefully considered the arguments and evidence presented by the parties. As explained herein, the motion is granted.
I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT GENERALLY
The purpose of summary judgment is to “pierce the pleadings and to assess the proof in order to see whether there is a...
Views: 0
Page 2461
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT/COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A Better Wireless, NISP, LLC (“ABW”) sought a loan from Rhythm Stone Media Group, LLC, d/b/a Jalin Realty Capital Advisors, LLC (“Jalin”) and the parties entered into an agreement under which Jalin would attempt to fund the loan in exchange for a $37,500 commitment fee. After Jalin did not fund the loan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Corporate Commission of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians (“the Commission”) retained Defendants Money Centers of America, Inc. and MCA of Wisconsin, Inc. (collectively “MCA”) to provide cash-access services at the Commission’s casinos. When the Commission terminated their agreement in April 2012, MCA owed it approximately $5.6 million, whic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Robert and Shirley Goss, filed this action against defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“BAÑA”), as successor by merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, alleging that BANA’s apparent failure to process a mortgage modification, after the servicer informed the Gosses it would assist them in seeking a change to their mortgage terms, is grounds for a variety of state law claims. B...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
COMMISSIONS IMPORT EXPORT S.A., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is defendants AppleIllinois, LLC, et al.’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Notice Claim.1 (Defs.’ Mot.) [Dkt 335.] Plaintiffs filed their opposition to the motion (Pis.’ Opp’n) [dkt 346], and Applelllinois filed its reply (Defs.’ Reply) [dkt 350]. For the reasons set forth below, Applelllinois’ motion is granted in part and denied in part...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this action for patent infringement and related claims, defendants move to dismiss the claims of civil conspiracy and breach of agreement; move for a more definite statement concerning the claims of patent infringement and breach of agreement; and move for joinder of an alleged coconspirator as a defendant under Fed.R.Civ.P. 19. For the reasons that follow, the c...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
NARDYNE JEFFERIES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY,
Plaintiff
v. Civil Action No. 12-cv-1984 (JDB)
YVETTE ALEXANDER, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Sibley ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the Motion to Dismiss Complaint, “Joined Complaint,” Amended Complaint, and Amended Complaint (II) [DE-41] filed by Defendants Donald W. Stephens, Shannon R. Joseph, William R. Pittman, Kenneth C. Titus, Sanford L. Steelman, Jr., Barbara A. Jackson, Donna S. Stroud, Robert C. Hunter, James A. Wynn, Jr., Sam Ervin, IV, Robert N. Hunter, Jr., and F. Blare ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Atrium Medical Center, et al. (Doc. No. 23) and Defendant Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (Doc. No. 25). For the reasons that follow, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is well-taken and is GRANTED; Plaintiffs’ motion *690for summary judgment is not wel...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court issued an Order on November 9, 2012, vacating and remanding the decision of the ALJ, below. (Order (Dock*884et # 18)). In reaching its decision, the Court determined that the ALJ had not adequately analyzed whether the plaintiff, Dennis Fulfer, suffered from an impairment that meets Listing 1.04, as listed in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. I. (Order 6-7). The Commissioner then ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
As a result of an automobile accident, Darlene Blair, the plaintiff, has sued GEI-CO General Insurance Company (“GEI-CO”), her insurance carrier and the defendant in this case, to collect Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) benefits under her insurance policy. GEICO removed the case to federal court, and here argues that summary judgment is appropriate on two grounds. First, ...
Views: 0
*907MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Rockland Burks and Adrienne Lawrence (“plaintiffs”) bring this failure to warn action against Abbott Laboratories (“Abbott”) and Mead Johnson & Company (“Mead”) individually and on behalf of their minor child, E.B. Plaintiffs allege that defendants’ powdered infant formula (“PIF”) was contaminated with Cronobacter sakazakii (C. sak), that E.B. became ill after bei...
Views: 0
*234OPINION
This putative class action arises out of the massive Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Bernard Madoff.
The lead Plaintiff in this case, Pension Trust Fund for Operating Engineers (“Operating Engineers”), is a multi-employer pension plan governed by ERISA. Operating Engineers was an investor in a hedge fund, Meridian Diversified ERISA Fund, Ltd. (“the ERISA Fund”), managed by Meridian Diver...
Views: 0
OPINION
*343
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................343
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ..............................................345
A. Plaintiffs Mortgage..................................................345
B. Defendant’s Loan Servicing Practices...................................346
C. Defendant’s Pre-Foreclosure Notices...........................
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The City of New York and Guadalupe Sarracino (“Sarracino”) (collectively “Defendants”) move to dismiss several claims in the Complaint charging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York state law for injuries arising out of a police search of Plaintiff George Gannon (“Plaintiff”)’s apartment. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED with respec...
Views: 0
*303
OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
By notice of motion dated August 28, 2012 (Docket1 Item 425), lead plaintiff Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana (“TRSL”) and plaintiffs Christine Fleckles, Julie Pe-russe and Aden Chase (collectively, -with TRSL, “Plaintiffs”) move for sanctions, including an adverse-inference jury instruction, against defendant Pfizer, Inc. (“Pfizer”) based on Pfize...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Jaswinder Sandhu (“plaintiff’) brings this action to obtain judicial review of the denial of his application for adjustment of status by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“US-CIS”), and to obtain an order that his application be approved. Currently before the Court is the government’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On January 11, 2012, the Grand Jury returned a 14-count superceding indictment charging, inter alia, defendants Steven Berman (“Berman”), Karen Persons (“Persons”) and John Jordan (“Jordan”) (collectively “the moving defendants”) in three separate conspiracies to commit securities fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349.
I. Background
The three conspiracies charged in the super...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
I. The Motions
This is the fifth case selected for trial as a bellwether in the In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation multidistrict litigation. This MDL involves claims that Fosamax, a drug designed and produced by defendant Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (“Merck”), caused users of Fosamax *484to suffer from a condition known as osteonecrosis of the jaw (“ONJ”). In the instant ca...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
JACQUALYN THORPE, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ViroPharma, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
v.
Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., in her official
capacity as Commissioner, Food and Drug
Administration, et al.,
Civil Action No. 12-0584 (ESH)
...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Frederick J. Harrington Jr. (“Harrington”) brings this action against defendants Atlantic Sounding Co., Inc. and Weeks Marine, Inc. (“Weeks”), pursuant to the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30104, for injuries sustained on April 10, 2005, allegedly as a result of defendants’ negligence while he was employed as a seaman aboard the defendant vessel MV CANDACE (“Candace”). Plaint...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter arises from Plaintiff Jeffrey Farneski’s suit against Defendants Hunterdon County, Office of the Hunterdon County Prosecutor (“HCPO”), Patrick Barnes, and Daniel Hurley for violation of his civil rights and retaliation during his employment with HCPO. Before the Court are the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants HCPO and Barnes (Dkt. No. 70) and the Motion for Summary Jud...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ [DKT. #31] MOTION TO DISMISS
The Defendants, Lebanon Board of Education, (the “Board”) and the Superintended of the Board, Janet Tyler (“Tyler”), have moved to dismiss the Plaintiff Malcom Leichter, Jr. (“Leichter”)’s amended complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. In the amended complaint,...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT BRE PROPERTIES, GRANTING DEFENDANT LEXINGTON’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT BRE PROPERTIES, AND DENYING DEFENDANT BRE PROPERTIES’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT LEXINGTON
In this insurance coverage action, the parties have filed four summary judgment motions. For the reasons sta...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendants Aurora Bank FSB (Aurora) and Aurora Loan Services, LLC (“ALS”) (collectively, “defendants”) to dismiss plaintiffs’ first amended complaint (“FAC”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motion is granted.1
I. BACKGROUND
This is a mass-joinder action involving twenty-four plain...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Mark McCauley’s Motion (#25) for [Partial] Summary Judgment and Defendant ASML U.S. Inc.’s Motion (# 30) for Partial Summary Judgment. For the reasons that follow, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion and DENIES Defendant’s Motion.
BACKGROUND
The following facts are undisputed unless otherwise noted.
In February 1998 Silicon Valley...
Views: 0
OPINION
On October 25, 2011, Plaintiff Deanne Berrey filed a Complaint in the Sangamon County Circuit Court. The two-count Complaint alleges state law claims for breach of insurance contract (Count I) and violation of the Illinois Insurance Code (Count II). In November 2011, Defendant, the Travelers Indemnity Company of America (Travelers), removed the case to federal court. The matter is now b...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants City of Stafford (“the City” or “Stafford”) and Chief Bonny Krahn’s (“Chief Krahn”) Motion for Summary Judgment Addressing Ratification Theory of Recovery. (Doc. No. 94.) After considering the motion, all responses thereto, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion must be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
I. BACKGROUND
T...
Views: 0
ORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of January, 2013, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Mildred E. Methvin (Doc. 29), recommending (1) that defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 7) be granted on Count TV and denied on Count II, and (2) that plaintiffs motion for leave to *403file an amended complaint be denied, and, following an independent review of th...
Views: 0
ORDER CORRECTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION On December 10, 2012; the United States magistrate judge issued his findings, conclusions, and recommendation in this case (“the findings”). In the findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the decision of the commissioner of the Social Security Administration of the United States (“the commissioner’...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are four (4) bankruptcy appeals filed by Appellant-Debtor Ken Goldsmith from the bankruptcy case at docket number 12-21157-JAD. These appeals come from orders issued by Bankruptcy Judge Jeffery A. Deller on four separate dates, all of which this Court has consolidated under Civ. A. No. 2:12-cv-00517. For the reasons that follow, all four appeals must be dismi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Adrienne Scott brings suit against Defendants Sunoco Logistics *347Partners, LP (“Sunoco”), Kimberly Legge, and Michelle Achenbach. Scott alleges that Sunoco subject her to disparate treatment and retaliated against her in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”), 43 Pa. St...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION (docket no. 16) AND GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND (docket no. 8)
This matter arises from an action for unpaid wages brought by Angelo Smith against his former employer, Detroit Entertainment, LLC, d/b/a MotorCity Casino (“MotorCity”) pursuant to Michigan’s Wages and Fringe Benefits Act, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 408.471-490. Smith filed his claim with a state administ...
Views: 0
Page 3288
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
PerkinElmer Health Sciences, Inc. (“PerkinElmer”) alleges that Agilent Technologies, Inc. (“Agilent”) is infringing two patents pertaining to the analysis of charged ions, for which PerkinElmer holds an exclusive license. Defendant has moved to dismiss the case while plaintiff seeks leave to file an amended complaint.
For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion to dismiss w...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Plaintiffs Rusby Adams, Jr., Leslie Schell, Daniel Stewart and Kevin Jones are former employees of the Metal Container Corporation (“MCC”), a subsidiary of defendant Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. (“ABC”). Adams was employed at the MCC plant in Columbus, Ohio, Schell...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant TASER International, Inc.’s motion to reconsider. (Doc. # 128). Plaintiffs opposed the motion (doc. # 131)1 and defendant replied (doc. # 133).
1. Factual background
This case arises out of the death of Randy Rich, a licensed physician and emergency room resident at Spring Valley Hospital in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Doc. # 1, ¶ 12). Dr. Rich had a history ...
Views: 0
*575
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Eugene Biagi’s Motion to Reconsider Meaning of “Willfulness’ Element of Campaign Finance Violations. [Dkt. 74.] For the following reasons, the Court will deny Defendant’s Motion.
I. Background
The basic facts of this case are recounted in the Court’s Memorandum Opinion dated May 26, 2011 which addressed Defendants’ motions to ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on three pending motions, including Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s (“Chase”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Dean C. Marchese’s four-count Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 11); Mr. Marchese’s Motion to Remand (ECF No. 13); and Chase’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply to Mot...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint and Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Demand for a Jury Trial [DE 11] (“Motion”). The Court has considered the Motion, Plaintiffs Response [DE 22], Defendants’ Reply [DE 25], the argument of counsel at the January 4, 2013 hearing, and is otherwise fully advised in the pr...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Lorenzo Lopez, commenced this action seeking damages for personal injuries that he allegedly sustained while using a conveyor manufactured by defendant SmurfiNStone Container Enterprises, Inc. On June 12, 2012, Magistrate Judge Marion W. Payson issued an Order (Dkt. # 14), following a telephone conference with counsel for both sides, stating that “[t]he Court ha[d] ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Roy L. Morrison, appearing pro se, alleges claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. L. § 296. The gist of plaintiffs claims is that he was terminated from his employment with defendant Dr. Pepper Snapple Group “because a white female contract worker said that [he] sex...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The plaintiff, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF), filed a six-count amended complaint against the defendant, L.B. Foster Company (L.B. Foster), on August 5, 2011. (ECF No. 15.) Now before me is L.B. Foster’s motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 43.) For the following reasons, I find that L.B. Foster’s motion must be granted.
I. BACKGROUND...
Views: 0
*1296 ORDER THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs Amended Complaint For Damages and Incidental Relief [D.E. 16]. THE COURT has considered the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. I. BACKGROUND On May 26, 2012, Monique Williams (Williams) went to Delray Auto Mall (Del-ray) to investigate whether ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This cause is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Pursuant to Judgment (d/e 27). Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Applying an hourly rate of $125 to the hours reasonably expended, Plaintiffs attorneys are entitled to attorney fees totaling $9,700. Plaintiffs Bill of Costs is allowed in the amount of $934.05.
I. BACKGROUND
In August 2...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case was on calendar on December 14, 2012 for a hearing on a motion to dismiss filed by defendants Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (KFH), Wynetta McGriff, Janitress Nathaniel, and Sherri Ambrose (collectively, “defendants”).1 Seth Neulight, Nixon Peabody LLP, appeared for defendants; Pamela Price appeared for plaintiff. After considering the parties’ arguments, the court GRANTS the motion....
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS; VACATING HEARING
The motion by defendant Trader Joe’s Company for judgment on the pleadings as to one product (apple juice) is currently scheduled for hearing on January 11, 2013. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1 (b), the Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument and hereby VACATES the hearing. For the ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
(Docket Nos. 57, 59-61)
Plaintiffs Stanley D. Cannon and Patricia R. Cannon have filed suit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; Assurant, Inc.; and the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”). In essence, Plaintiffs challenge certain practices related to Wells Fargo’s forced purchase of flood insurance for borrower...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Rachel Hernandez brought this action in state court seeking redress against her former employer Ignite Restaurant Group (“Ignite”), doing business as Joe’s Crab Shack, and her former supervisor Kelly Alton for injuries allegedly arising out of Plaintiffs wrongful termination and employment discrimination. (Ignite’s Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1, Ex. A.) Ignite ther...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Before the court is petitioner Gang “Steven” Chen’s (“petitioner” or “Chen”) petition for writ of habeas corpus, along with his motion for a temporary restraining order and motion for preliminary injunction. Although the court indicated at the hearing that it was inclined to deny the petition, having read the parties’ papers and carefully considere...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (Doc. 9) and the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 10). For the following reasons, the Defendant’s Motion is DENIED, the Plaintiffs’ Motion *1301is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, and the case is REMANDED for reconsideration of the Plaintiffs’ claim.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On October 1...
Views: 0
ORDER
On or about December 4, 2011, the Plaintiff Dr. Shari Camhi (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the Defendants Glen Cove City School District; the Board of Education for the Glen Cove City School District; Richard Maccarone, individually and as President and a Member for the Board; David Huggins, individually and as Vice President and a Member of the Board; and Ida McQuair, Gail...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
Presently pending before the Court is: (1) a second motion filed by Allstate Insurance Company, Allstate Indemnity Company, and Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Company (“Allstate” or “the Plaintiffs”) to dismiss and stay the Defendants’ counterclaims (DE 96-97); (2) a motion to dismiss and/or abstain filed by Hisham Elzanaty, Hisham Ahmed Elsherbiny, Alan G...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York (“the Fed”) has filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (“Compl.”) filed by Bruce Goonan (“Plaintiff’). Plaintiff alleges discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., the New York State Human Rights Law, Executive Law § 290 et seq., and the Administrative Code of the C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court as a pre-trial determination whether the Defendant, Alexis Candelario-Santana (“Defen*193dant” or “Candelario-Santana”),1 is mentally retarded for the purposes of Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 122 S.Ct. 2242, 153 L.Ed.2d 335 (2002), and the Federal Death Penalty Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3596(c).2 The court held three days of evidentiary hearings...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Syncrude Canada Ltd. (“Syn-crude” or “Plaintiff’) has brought this action pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Foreign Money-Judgment Recognition Act, Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, §§ 10-701 et seq. (“the Recognition Act”) against Defendants The Highland Consulting Group Inc. (“HCG”), High Energy Consultants, Inc. (“HEC”), and The Highland Group Intern...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is the joint motion of defendants Avco Corporation, Lycoming Engines, Textron Systems Corporation, Textron, Inc., Precision Airmotive LLC, Precision Airmotive Corporation, Schweizer Aircraft Corporation, Schweizer Holdings, Inc., Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, United Technologies Corporation, and Champion Aerospace LLC (collectively “defendants”) to dismiss this dive...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) Criminal No. 89-162-4 (RCL)
v. )
) , ,.
JAMES ANTONIO JONES, ) F 13 E w
Defendant. § ';AN g gm
) @lerl18 U.S.C. § 3582(0)(2). Upon consideration of
defendant's Motion [131], the entire record herein, the applicable law, and for the reasons set
forth below, defendant's motion will be denied.
I. BACKGROUND
D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND APPOINTMENT OF CLASS COUNSEL [DKT. # 34]
Before the Court is Plaintiff, Kenneth Linsley’s (“Linsley”) motion for class certifi*13cation and appointment of class counsel. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant FMS Investment Corp. (“FMS”) violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., in...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This is an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., and the New York Labor Law, alleging that defendants, Hillside Children’s Center and Hillside Family of Agencies (collectively “Hillside”) have failed to pay plaintiffs wages as required by law. The three named plaintiffs, Mary Peck, Michael Sculli, and Carolyn Proper, all of whom are form...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this diversity action, Plaintiff Lirlene Gardley-Starks asserts numerous causes of action under Mississippi law, arguing that her ingestion of the prescription drug metoclopramide caused her to develop a neurological disorder known as tardive dyskinesia. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment [81] filed by Defendant Schwarz Pharma, Inc., and a Motion for Partial...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons discussed below, the Motion is denied.1
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
I. Parties and Initial Injury
Plaintiff Mary Demetrulias worked as a cashier for one of Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.’s (“Walmart”) retail stores in Scottsdale, Arizona. (Doc. Ill ¶ 3; Doc. 117 ¶ 3.) While at work on March 6, 2010, Demetrulias stu...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (“Defendants’ Motion”), filed on October 23, 2012 (Doc. No. 31), Plaintiffs Response, filed on November 06, 2012 (Doc. No. 32), and Defendants’ Reply in Support of their Motion to Dismiss (“Defendants’ Reply”), filed on December 10, 2012. (Doc. No. 35.) After a careful review of the parties’ s...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant Wells Fargo Bank’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 24), Plaintiff Robert S. Blake’s memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 32), and Wells Fargo’s reply (ECF No. 38). Wells Fargo moves to dismiss on abstention grounds or, alternatively, on the basis that Plaintiff fails to state claim upon which the Court can grant relief. For the reasons set f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the “Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment” (the “Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment”) [Dkts. 8, 13]1 by Defendants Patrick R. Donahoe, *564Postmaster General, United States Postal Service; Dr. Francis Collins, Director, National Institute of Health; and Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, United States Department of Edu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Rusty James Smith, filed a Complaint in this Court on November 2, 2011, seeking review of the Commissioner’s decision to deny his claim for Social Security benefits under Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq. and 1381 et seq. This Court may review a final decision by the Commissioner. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Plaintiff filed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Eight medically fragile disabled individuals currently receive funding from the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (“DHFS”) for approximately 16 hours a day of in-home skilled nursing services. These services allow the disabled individuals, Plaintiffs in this case, to avoid constant hospitalization. As of their twenty-first birthdays, Plaintiffs h...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
1. INTRODUCTION1
This Court’s prior holdings establish that: (1) Vivendi Universal, S.A. (“Vivendi”) is precluded from contesting the elements of a Section 10(b) claim, save for reliance; (2) GAMCO Investors, Inc. (“GAMCO”) is entitled to the fraud on the market presumption, which shifts the burden to Vivendi to disprove reliance; and (3) Vivendi is precluded from raising the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff John A. Clifford (“Clifford” or “plaintiff’) commenced this action against the United States Coast Guard (“Coast Guard”) and the United States of America (collectively, “defendants”) pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701-706 (the “APA”), seeking *302review of the Coast Guard’s decision denying him a merchant mariner credential with an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION On June 22, 2012, following a 24-day bench trial, this Court convicted the three Defendants. All three Defendants were convicted of Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice. Defendant Daum was also convicted of three counts of Obstruction of Justice and two counts of Subornation of Perjury. Defendants have filed a Renewed Motion to Dismiss, or, Alternatively, for a New Trial [Dkt. No. 2...
Views: 0
Page 4182
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Application for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. #8). Defendants have filed a response (Dkt. # 16), and the Court has held an evidentiary hearing (Dkt. # 17). After hearing the evidence and reviewing the parties’ briefs and applicable law, the Court finds that Plaintiffs Application for Preliminary Injunction should be denied.
I.
Factual and procedural bac...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is the defendants,’ Christopher R. Klann and Swift Transportation Company of Arizona, LLC (“Swift”) Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively Motion to Stay and Compel Arbitration [Doc. 7]. The plaintiff, Wesley Smith, filed a response in opposition [Doc. 12], and the defendants filed a reply [Doc. 16], For the reasons stated herein, the defendants’ motion will be GR...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiff Rakim Paulin, proceeding pro se, brings various Section 1983 claims alleging violations of his constitutional rights, arising from an arrest and subsequent events that occurred on January 9, 2009.
Specifically, plaintiff alleges (1) City of Beacon police officers Joseph Conti and Thomas Figlia falsely arrested plaintiff; (2) Conti and Figlia used excessive force in...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Michael Scholten, Jessica M. Kramer, Aexsandra Del Real, and Michael Choi (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this putative class action against Defendants Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A, Inc. (collectively, “Toyota”) on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated who purchased or leas...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal Action No. 07-135 (JDB)
THOMAS E. PETERSON, JR.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant Thomas E. Peterson, Jr. has moved to v...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This is a suppression hearing. The attorney for the defendant Heriberto Martinez (the “defendant” or “Martinez”) moved to suppress the statements made by the defendant to law enforcement officers in four separate jurisdictions. The statements were made in separate interrogations by (1) the New York City Police Department — two sets of statements; (2) the Nassau ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), filed this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) on behalf of Claimants Kayla Roberts, Ashley Hopmayer, and Miranda Watson against Defendant, The Finish Line, Inc. (“Finish Line”), claimants’ former employer. Plaintiff asserts claims for sexual harassment a...
Views: 0
*949MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Bateo Manufacturing’s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony [Docket No. 47] and Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 50], The Court heard oral argument on December 14, 2012. For the reasons that follow, the Court denies both motions.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
Plaintiff Adam McRunnel is a Minnesot...
Views: 0
ORDER Pro se plaintiff Dwight Andre Williams brings this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1963, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., the New York State Human Rights Law, Executive Law § 290 et seq. (“NYSHRL”), and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107 et seq. (“NYCHRL”). Williams alleges that the City of New York (the “City”) and the Department of Parks and Re...
Views: 0
*400
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case presents issues of first impression as to whether the Women’s Preventive Healthcare regulations under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act pass muster under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. In resolving these questions we also decide whether the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens U...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants investigated and prosecuted Plaintiffs for allegedly abusing their positions at the State’s Attorney’s Office in McHenry County, Illinois. Once Plaintiffs defeated the charges against them— through voluntary dismissal and acquittal at trial — they sued special prosecutors Thomas K. McQueen and Henry C. Tonigan and certain Quest employees hired to assist the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CERTIFY (DOC. #117) BUT STAYING CASE
On December 14, 2012, this Court granted Defendants’ motions for summary judgment with respect to excessive force, malicious prosecution and due process claims but denied it on Plaintiffs’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unlawful arrest, search, and seizure of property claims.
Applying Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 98...
Views: 0
*1154ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF # 2) filed by Plaintiffs Marc J. Randazza, Jennifer Randazza, and Natalia Randazza (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). Also before the Court are Defendant Cox’s Motion for Judges and Clerks to Sign a Conflict of Interest Disclosure (ECF # 19), Defendant Cox’s Motion for Judge Gloria Navarro’s Recusal (ECF #20), and Plaint...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the motion of the Housing Authority of New Orleans to dismiss. For the reasons that follow, the motion is DENIED.
Background
United States Fire Insurance Company seeks to enforce a 2009 settlement agreement that was executed during prior litigation in this Court. The settlement agreement resolved U.S. Fire’s contribution *584claim and the Housing Authority ...
Views: 0
*117
ORDER AND REASONS
[Granting Final Approval of the Medical Benefits Class Action Settlement]
Before the Court is a motion (Rec. Doc. 7112) by BP seeking final approval of the Medical Benefits Class Action Settlement, as amended on May 1, 2012 (Rec. Doc. 6427-1). Also before the Court is Class Counsel’s memorandum in support of final approval of the Medical Settlement, which the Court treats...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED.
I. Facts
In 2009, Michael Dennett, a resident of Middletown, Rhode Island, was being treated by the Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center (the “Providence VA”) in Provi...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT; AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED 50(B) MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT OR A REQUEST FOR A NEW TRIAL
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Willis C. McAllister (“McAllister” or “Plaintiff’), an African-American, p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REMANDING CASE
Pending before the Court is the Plaintiffs Motion to Remand [Doc. 14], filed on August 8, 2012. This motion has since been fully briefed and is now ripe for decision. Having reviewed the record and considered the arguments of the parties, this Court concludes that the motion to remand must be GRANTED.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Defendant Fast Au...
Views: 0
*52
OPINION & ORDER
Before the Court is Lead Plaintiff City of Miami General Employees’ and Sanitation Employees’ Retirement Trust’s (“plaintiff’) motion for class certification pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 Plaintiff seeks certification of the following class: “All persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired SMART common stock pursua...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. (Docs. 38, 39.) After careful consideration, Defendants’ motions are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendants’ motions are granted as to Counts Three, Four, and Five only. The Government shall have fourteen days to submit an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies identified in this order. The Government is on NOTICE that fa...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. *115928). This matter was heard with oral argument on January 11, 2013. Jay P. Ma-non appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs. Michael E. McFarland, Jr. appeared on behalf of the Defendants. The Court has reviewed the motion, the response, and the re...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE THE COURT is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Claims for Wrongful Termination (ECF No. 32). This matter was heard without oral argument on December 28, 2012. The Court has reviewed the motion, the response, and the reply, and is fully informed. BACKGROUND Plaintiff has sued her former employer for wrongful ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I. Introduction
Before the Court are Motions for Preliminary Injunction filed by the Suquamish Tribe and Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action. Case Nos. 12-cv-1455, Dkt. #15; No. 12-cv5537, Dkt. #19. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin the United States Navy from constructing a second explosives handling wharf (“EHW-2”) at Naval Base Kitsap i...
Views: 0
Page 4924
OPINION
Before the Court is plaintiff T-Mobile Northeast LLC’s (“T-Mobile” or “Plain*477tiff”) Motion for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) (“Motion”), in this matter, versus defendant Borough of Leonia Zoning Board of Adjustment (“Board,” “Borough,” or “Defendant”).
This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. This matt...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Years of struggle through the protracted and intensely litigated discovery in this case (one of the oldest still pending on my docket) have convinced plaintiffs that months after the close of discovery, defendants Adam *418Swiech, Richard Swiech, and Derek Lewieki have not produced — and are unlikely ever to produce — all of the evidence to which plaintiffs are enti...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
This motion filed by Defendant, Northampton County Child Welfare Service, seeks to dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint. Plaintiff claims discrimination in the termination of his employment. For the reasons set forth below, I will grant in part and deny in part Defendant’s motion to dismiss.
I. Background
Plaintiffs Amended Complaint states that he was born in Greece. (Amend. Compl. ¶ ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (Doc. 12) and brief in support; Defendant American Medical Systems, Inc.’s (“AMS”) Response in Opposition *902(Doc. 18); and Defendant Johnson Regional Medical Center’s (“JRMC”) Response in Opposition (Doc. 19). For the reasons discussed herein, Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (Doc. 12) is DENIED.
According to the Compla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND FINDINGS SUPPORTING ISSUANCE OF SEARCH WARRANT FOR 10 CYR CIRCLE, ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS On January 2, 2013, the United States Attorney presented the undersigned with the Application for a Search Warrant (“the Application”) on the home of Richard Keller who is a defendant in the case of United States v. Keller, Cr. No.2012-10377-FDS.1 On January 3, 2012, the Court issued the warra...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Pending is Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 68). The Motion is granted. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, Jackson County, Missouri, filed this putative class action on April 23, 2012, in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, which was subsequently removed to federal court on May 31, 2012....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this contraband cigarette trafficking and money laundering prosecution, defendant Anjay Patel (“Patel”) seeks to modify the protective order to release assets restrained by the government in pretrial forfeiture. In the notice of forfeiture appended to the indictment, the government seeks to forfeit $20.9 million in Patel’s assets, representing the purchase price of the con...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) Coalition (“ANSWER”) filed this lawsuit in January 2005 against the Secretary of the Interior, the Director of the National Park Service (“NPS”), and the Director of the Secret Service, challenging the constitutionality of certain policies that restrict ANSWER’S ability to engage in expressive activity during the Presidential I...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an insurance case arising under Pennsylvania law, removed to this Court from Pennsylvania state court. (ECF No. 1). The Plaintiff claims that he was severely injured and subsequently disabled when the bicycle he was riding was hit by an unidentified car. He has claimed stacked uninsured motor vehicle insurance benefits of $2,000,000 under a policy underwritten by the ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Feve Lopez sued Bank of America, N.A. and Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) in Clinton County Circuit Court, alleging violation of Michigan Compiled Laws §§ 600.3204(4)(a) and 600.3205a by Bank of America, and violation of the Fifth Amendment due process clause by Fannie Mae. On June 22, 2012, the defendants removed the case to this Court. (Dkt. No. 1.) This...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court are (1) The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 398); and (2) The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation’s Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 430).
Also before the Court are the various parties’ briefs regarding the impact of Rashaw v. United Consumers Credit Union, 685 F.3d 739 (8th Cir.2012) (Doc. Nos. 415, 423, and 424). Notably, defe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Tower Rock Stone Company brings this action to vacate an arbitration award in favor of defendants Quarry and Allied Workers Local No. 830 and the Eastern Missouri Laborers District Coun*904cil. Defendants have counterclaimed for enforcement of the award and have also moved for an award of attorneys’ fees and prejudgment interest. The parties have filed cross-motio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Kimberly Brown brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §. 1983 and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act, Ark.Code Ann. § 16-123-101 et seq. (“ACRA”). She filed suit against defendants Sheriff Charles “Doc” Holladay, Randy Morgan, and Shawn Smith in their individual and official capacities. Ms. Brown alleges that she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender when ...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (ECF No. 6). Defendant Go Fit, LLC (“Go Fit”) filed a Response (ECF No. 9), and Plaintiff filed a Reply (ECF No. 10). UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, Response, Reply, Defendant’s Notice of Removal (ECF No. 1), Plaintiffs Complaint (ECF No. 1-2), the pertinent portions of the record, an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
This action arises out of lease agreements between Plaintiffs, a group of individual truck drivers, and Defendant VFS, Inc. (“VFS”), which provided that Plaintiffs would haul cargo for VFS in exchange for certain compensation. Plaintiffs bring this action alleging fraud, conversion,1 and breach ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are The Lirette Family’s Motion for Summary Judgment1 filed by Vaughan Andrew Lirette, Jr., Kenneth W. Lirette, Trade Lirette Dolan, Stephen J. Lirette, Janelle Marie Lirette, and David P. Lirette (collectively, the “Lirette Family”) and Castex’s Motion for Summary Judgment2 filed by Castex Energy 1995, L.P. and Castex Energy, Inc. (collectively, “Castex”). In...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. # 390), filed on July 17, 2012. Defendant Jem Sportswear, Inc. (“Jem”) filed an Opposition (Doc. # 397) on August 3, 2012. Defendants A.V.E.L.A., Inc. (“Avela”); X One X Movie Archive, Inc. (“X One X”); and Leo Valencia (“Valencia”), collectively the “Avela Defendants,” and Defendant Central Mills, Inc. (“Freeze”) ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs John and Marguerite Viteritti (“plaintiffs” or “the Viterittis”) commenced this action alleging that defendant Incorporated Village of Bayville (“defendant” or the ‘Village”) seized a portion of their real property, thereby violating, inter alia, their Fourteenth Amendment equal protection rights. Plaintiffs also asserted state law causes of action for trespass, pr...
Views: 0
Page 5329
ORDER
(Motion To Stay Discovery # 9)
Before the court is defendants United States Department of Fish and Wildlife and Sharon McKelvey’s, in her official capacity (hereinafter “Federal Defendants”), Motion to Stay Discovery. (#9). Plaintiff filed an Opposition (# 13), and the Federal Defendants filed a Reply (# 18).
Background
Plaintiff Ministerio Roca Solida (hereinafter “Solid Rock Ministry” o...
Views: 0
*674MEMORANDUM
Ronald Locke (“Petitioner”) is a prisoner at the State Correctional Institution in Frackville, Pennsylvania. Petitioner filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Habeas Petition”) challenging his custody. Magistrate Judge Sandra Mooré Wells recommended denial of the Habeas Petition and Petitioner raised two objections. For the reasons that foll...
Views: 0
Page 5332
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER This matter is before the court on Defendant Landau Uniforms, Inc’s motion for leave to file a second amended answer (Doc # 129). By way of the proposed amendment, defendant seeks to assert that plaintiff failed *386to properly mitigate because she failed to use reasonable efforts to obtain substantially equivalent work. The matter has been briefed and the pa...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order
In 2006, plaintiffs Leon Silverman, James Crowley, Janet Sachs, Herbert Pobiner, Louis Flacks, and Paul Berkman as Trustees of the Union Mutual Medical Fund (“UMMF”), and the UMMF (collectively “Plaintiffs”) brought suit against defendants George Miranda, Robert Bellach, Anthony Cerbone, Martin Sheer, and John Does 1-6 in their capacities as Trustees of Teamsters Local 210 ...
Views: 0
TENTATIVE FINDINGS The Court has received the revised presentence investigation report and addendum in this case. The defendant has filed an objection to the revised report and addendum (filing 33). The defendant has also filed a motion for variance from the sentencing guidelines (filing 34). IT IS ORDERED: 1. The Court will consult and follow the Federal Sentencing Guidelines to the extent permit...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Court once again takes up Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint. ECF No. 13. Survival of this case depends on whether 18 U.S.C. § 983(a)(3) implicitly provides a private right of action for claimants, like Diamond Casino Cruise (“Diamond”), to seek the return of seized property. Because it does not, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
II. BACKGROU...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................433
II. BACKGROUND.........................................................433
A. Facts...............................................................433
B. Procedural History...................................................435
III. DISCUSSION................................................
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S CONTINGENT MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In this lawsuit, the Plaintiffs seek insurance coverage under a specific policy that was in effect between 1998 and 1999. Before this Court are three motions for summary judgment.1 Defendant National U...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on several post-verdict motions: Plaintiffs’ *1303Motion for New Trial (DE 173); Plaintiffs’ Motion to Alter and Amend Judgment (DE 174); Defendants’ Renewed Motion for Directed Verdict (DE 176); Defendants’ Motion to Alter Judgment (DE 177); and Plaintiffs’ Motion to tax Costs (DE 178). The Court received considerable briefing and heard argument on the mot...
Views: 1
ORDER This is a declaratory judgment action. Atlantic Casualty Insurance Company (Atlantic Casualty) issued GTL, Inc. (GTL) a *1172commercial general liability insurance policy. It now seeks a declaration under that policy that it has no duty to indemnify, defend, or cover claims asserted by John P. Greytak (Greytak) and Tanglewood Investors Limited Partnership (Tanglewood) against GTL in an under...
Views: 0
ORDER ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED ANSWER
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the court are three motions: (1) Defendant Choice Cash Advance, LLC, f/k/a Choice Insurance Agency, LLC’s (“Choice Insurance”) motion for summary judgment (Dkt. #41); (2) Plaintiff DZ Bank AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftbank, Frankfurt AM Main, New York Branch’s (“DZ Bank”) cross m...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS THIS MATTER came before the Court on January 11, 2013, based upon the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Colleen Patridge-Stau-dinger was represented by James E. Egan. Richard A. Flaiz, M.D., was represented by William D. McCool. The government was represented by Alexander C. Ekstrom. BACKGROUND A number of allegations are set forth below. The Court has drawn them from ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 34). This matter was heard with oral argument on January 10, 2013. Patricia B. Urquhart appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs. Michael C. Bolasina appeared on behalf of the Defendants. The Court has reviewed the briefing and the record and files herein, and is...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
FREEDOM WATCH, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-731 (RB...
Views: 1
OPINION An attorney may not drop one client like a “hot potato” in order to avoid a conflict with another, more remunerative client.1 Suppose a criminal defense attorney represents an individual accused of a heinous crime. The attorney negotiates the plea bargain in an exemplary fashion, and so the defendant receives 19 1/2 years in prison rather than life. Several months later, the defendant (now...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ BILL OF COSTS AND PLAINTIFFS’ PETITION FOR FEES AND EXPENSES
In this case, the parties litigated a potpourri of issues concerning the constitutionality of Maine’s regulation of ballot question committees, political action committees, independent expenditures, and attribution and disclaimer statements in political communications involving candidate elections. The ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are (1) Plaintiff Dorothy Snow’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 31), and (2) Defendant Boston Mutual Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 32). For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that Plaintiffs motion is due to be DENIED, and Defendant’s motion is due to be Granted in part and denied IN PART.
I. INTRODUCTION
This ...
Views: 0
OPINION
On March 26, 2010, Plaintiff Agence France Presse (“AFP”) filed a Complaint against photographer Daniel Morel seeking a declaration that AFP had not infringed Morel’s copyrights in certain photographs and alleging commercial defamation. (ComplA 3). In response, Morel filed counterclaims against AFP, Getty Images, Inc. (“Getty”), and the Washington Post (the “Post”),1 asserting *551that ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
In this Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act and Maine Human Rights Act claim, the Plaintiff claims he was fired for blowing the whistle on his employer’s sales of diver detection equipment to China— sales the Plaintiff thought were illegal and unsafe. The Defendants move to dismiss the Plaintiffs Complaint for failure to state a claim upon...
Views: 0
memorandum: opinion AND ORDER
Pending before the court are defendant West Asset Management’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction [Docket 24] and Motion to Stay [Docket 26]. These motions have been fully briefed by both parties and the matters are ripe for review. As discussed below, this court HOLDS today that an offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 tha...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
TITUS KORNEGAY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-984 (GK)
)
MASTER SECURITY, LLC, et al., )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed this action on October 17, 2012, for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, while confined at the District of Columbia *122Jail on a parole violator warrant executed on August 27, 2012. (Pet. at 1.) Petitioner claims that his current confinement violates the due process clause and federal regulations because the United States Parole...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff FutureGen Co. (“FutureGen” or “the company”) brings this action against defendant Richard Carter (“Carter”) alleging: (1) conversion and civil theft, (2) fraud, (3) fraudulent conversion, (4) constructive fraud, (5) unjust enrichment, (6) breach of fiduciary duty, and (7) constructive trust. Compl. [Dkt. # 1] ¶¶ 43-88. Carter has moved to dismiss this action for lac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Araya Henok brings this action against Chase Home Finance, LLC (“Chase”), Shapiro & Burson, LLP (“Shapiro”), and Fannie Mae, challenging the legality of the foreclosure on a property he owned on C Street S.E. in Washington, D.C. (“the property”). After the defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings arguing that Henok’s complaint failed to satisf...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
According to his complaint, William Quezada owns an apartment building that, while he was married and for some time after, was held in the name of his now ex-wife. Mr. Quezada alleges that the District of Columbia Housing Authority and The Community Partnership for the Prevention of Homelessness both rented units in the building and, for a period of time after his divorce, paid...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Firebird Global Master Fund II Ltd. (“Firebird”) brings this action under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., seeking to enforce a foreign judgment against the defendant Republic of Nauru (“Nauru”). After default was entered against Nauru, Firebird moved for entry of default judgment arguing that Nauru waived sovereign immunity an...
Views: 0
*678
Memorandum of Opinion and Order
Introduction
This matter is before the Court upon defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11). This case alleges that defendant discriminated against plaintiff on the basis of age when it forced him to resign or constructively discharged him from employment. For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED.
Facts
Plaintiff Robert T. DeBarr filed th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiff is the fiduciary for the Glass Dimensions, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan and Trust (“Glass Dimensions Plan”). Plaintiff brings suit on behalf of the Glass Dimensions Plan and a class of other ERISA retirement plans that invested in collective trust funds offered and managed by Defendants. Plaintiff asserts that Defendants breached their fiduciary duty, in violati...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the Motions for Summary Judgment of Defendants Village of Ossining, Village of Ossining Police Department, Police Chief Joseph Burton, Police Officer James Drohan, and John Does 1-10 (the “Ossining Defendants”), (Doc. 52),1 and Village of Croton-on-Hudson, Village of Croton-on-Hudson Police Department, and Police Officer John Smith (the “Croton Defendants”),...
Views: 0
*1281
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Jain Irrigation, Inc.’s motion for partial summary judgment regarding plaintiffs tort claims and prayer for- punitive damages (# 86).1 Plaintiff opposed (# 100) and defendant replied (# 115). The court has thoroughly reviewed the record and grants defendant Jain Irrigation, Inc.’s motion for partial summary judgment (# 86).
I. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKG...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Ibrahim Turkmen, Akhil Sachdeva, Ahmer Iqbal Abbasi, Anser Mehmood, Benamar Benatta, Ahmed Khalifa, Saeed Hammouda, and Purna Raj Bajracharya bring this putative class action against John Ashcroft, Robert Mueller, James Ziglar, Dennis Hasty, Michael Zenk, James Sherman, Salvatore Lopresti, and Joseph Cuciti. Plaintiffs were arrested and detained by federal author...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This insurance coverage dispute arises out of a breach of contract and negligence lawsuit pending in the New York Supreme Court. The plaintiff Atlantic Casualty Insurance Company (“Atlantic Casualty”) seeks a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend Value Waterproofing, Inc. (“Value”) or to indemnify Value in the underlying action. Value asserts a mirror counterclaim r...
Views: 0
*223
OPINION
Plaintiffs Dr. Carroll B.B. Lesesne and International Cosmetic Surgery, P.C. filed this action on May 8, 2012, against the Defendants, Charlotte Brimecome and Ian Brimecome, alleging tortious interference with contract and business relations, tortious interference with prospective business relations and economic advantage, and bad faith reporting under New York Public Health Law § ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant Paul David Hite is charged by Superseding Indictment with two *114counts of attempted coercion and enticement of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). The Government alleges that the Defendant engaged in a series of online chats and telephone conversations with an undercover police detective posing as an adult and arranged to engage in illicit sexual activity w...
Views: 0
ENTRY REGARDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
This cause is before the Court on two motions to dismiss, one filed by Defendants Comlux Aviations Services, LLC, Comlux America, LLC, and Comlux the Aviation Group (referred to collectively herein as “the Comlux Defendants”) (dkt. no. 101) and the other by Defendants Indianapolis Jet Center, Inc., and Randy Keeker (“the IJC Defendants”) (dkt. no. 104). Both o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case involves two oil-production platforms located off the Louisiana coast. The plaintiff, W & T Offshore, Inc. (“WTI”), owns the South Timbalier 229 platform (“ST-229”). WTI and Apache Corporation entered into a Production Handling Agreement (“PHA”) under which Apache processed WTI’s oil from the ST-229 platform. Apache processed the oil along with oil that it produced ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees (doc. 34) and Plaintiffs Supplementary Fee Petition (doc. 40). The attorney’s fee issue has been extensively briefed and is now ripe for disposition.
I. Relevant Background.
Plaintiff, Reena Lee, brought this action against The Krystal Company (“Krystal”) alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This case involves a dispute between a lender and the borrower and guarantor, with respect to a loan and a mortgage on commercial property in Peabody, Massachusetts.
This Court, sitting without a jury, presided over a three-day trial of this case in December, 2012. The Court now announcés its findings of fact and conclusions of law.
I.Findings of Fact
A. The Parties
1. De...
Views: 1
OPINION
In this diversity action involving the sale of a Virginia business, the disappointed buyer has sued for damages for breach of the written contract governing the transaction, as well as for related tort claims. Because I find that Delaware law governs the case pursuant to a choice-of-law provision of the contract and because that law does not support the claims made by the plaintiff, I wil...
Views: 0
*1076OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Emily Johnson (“Johnson”) filed this action asserting a single negligence claim against defendants Scott Gibson and Robert Stillson (collectively “Defendants”) for injuries she sustained when she fell while jogging in Tom McCall Waterfront Park (the “Park”). Defendants move for summary judgment and seek substitution of the City of Portland (“City”),...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss. For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be granted. I. BACKGROUND Gallaudet University hired plaintiff “on August 15, 2005 as a full-time, regular tenure-track instructor for the Department of Business.” Am. Compl. ¶ 7 (internal quotation marks omitted). Although plaintiff “had ... completed all of his ...
Views: 0
*305
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Stanley and Marisol Laskowski initiated this action against the United States of America Department of Veterans Affairs for damages pursuant to the Federal Torts Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq. The plaintiffs allege medical malpractice against the medical professionals and administrative staff at the Wilkes-Barre Veterans Affairs Medical Center (“WBVAMC”) locate...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an action to review the final decision of the defendant Commissioner of Social Security *1183(“Commissioner”) denying the claimant Stephanie L. Guerra’s applications for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act (“Act”) and for supplemental security income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Act. With the administr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Agudas Chasidei Chabad of the United States (“Chabad”) has moved for civil contempt sanctions against defendants the Russian Federation (“Russia”), the Russian Ministry of Culture and Mass Communication (the “Ministry”), the Russian State Library (“RSL”), and the Russian State Military Archive (“RSMA”) based on their failure to comply with this Court’s July 30, 2010 O...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS CERTAIN STATUTORY AND NON-STATUTORY AGGRAVATING FACTORS FROM THE GOVERNMENT’S THIRD AMENDED NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK THE DEATH PENALTY
*964TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.INTRODUCTION........................................................966
II.CONTEXTUAL MATTERS...............................................967
A. Scope Of The Penalty Ret...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Granting the Defendants’ Motion for Transfer
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The plaintiff is a District of Columbia resident who alleges that she was injured in a Georgia franchise of a Holiday Inn. The defendants are Holiday Inns, Inc., a corporation licensed to do business in the District; the Island Group, LLC, a fr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND RELATED EVIDENTIARY MOTIONS
This matter is before the court on two motions for summary judgment and two related evidentiary motions. For reasons set forth below: (1) the motion to dismiss or for summary judgment filed by Defendants The University of South Carolina (“USC”), USC’s former Athletic Director, Eric Hyman (“Hyman”), and USC’s Deputy ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the court in the above-captioned matter is the motion to dismiss (Doc. 8) filed by defendant SWEPI, LP (“SWEPI”). In their complaint (Doc. 1), plaintiffs Robert Stewart, Edna Stewart, Thomas Bower, Lynn Bower, and Derra, Ltd. (collectively, when appropriate, “plaintiffs”), bring four counts: Count I seeks a declaratory judgment that the oil and gas lease that is the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this § 1983 civil rights action, plaintiffs, Mark E. Murphy and Pamela S. Murphy (“the Murphys”), claim that the Village of Plainfield (“the Village”) and Plainfield Township (“the Township”) took their property in violation of the takings clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution (Count V). The Murphys also claim that the Vi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the court are (1) defendant Keith Ringham’s motions to deny attorneys’ fees and to stay briefing on the plaintiffs motion for fees and costs; and (2) plaintiff Joseph Olinyk’s motion for attorneys’ fees. For the reasons explained below, we grant Ringham’s motion to deny fees, deny his motion to stay briefing as moot, and deny the plaintiffs motion for attorneys’ fees. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
The plaintiffs in this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are the estate and parents of C.A., who drowned at the public high school he attended during a science project conducted in the school’s swimming pool. The defendants included not only the Houston Independent School District (“HISD”) but also individual school employees. In an earlier ruling, this court granted the employee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Kevin Hairston has sued the Public Printer1 of the United States Government Printing Office (“GPO”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.Cr § 2000e-16(a), alleging that the GPO failed to promote him because of his race, and denied him training because of his race and as retaliation for prior EEO activity. The GPO has moved for summary judgment. B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Araya Henok brings this action against Chase Home Finance, LLC (“Chase”), Shapiro & Burson, LLP (“Shapiro”), and Fannie Mae1, challenging the legality of the foreclosure on a property he owned on 16th Street N.E. in Washington, D.C. (“the property”). After the defendants moved for judgment on the plead*166ings arguing that Henok’s complaint failed t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Company’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss and/or Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc. # 21] as to all claims by Plaintiff Lawrence D. Guessford, Jr. (“Plaintiff’). Also before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Defendant’s Affirmative Defenses and/or Motion for P...
Views: 1
*126OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on the motion by Plaintiffs for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). Defendant Cigna (“Defendant” or “Cigna”) has opposed the motion. The Court has opted to rule on the motion without oral argument, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be denied.
I. Backg...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF # 62) and Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF # 65). For the following reasons, the Court denies Defendant’s Motion and grants, in part, Plaintiff’s Motion.
According to Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint, Plaintiff Wheel Specialties, Ltd. (“Custom Wheels”) is a designer, distributor and...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR NEW TRIAL
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Tami Skrovig (“plaintiff’ or “Mrs. Skrovig”) filed an amended complaint. asserting various claims of negligence against defendant BNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”) arising from a pickup and railroad maintenance machine collision in which her husband, Thomas Skrovig (“Mr. Skrovig”), died. (Docket 37). ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 61) and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Certification or, in the Alternative, Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 73). These motions are fully briefed and ripe for disposition. For the reasons that follow, the Court DENIES both motions.
I. Background1
On April 13, 2011, Plaintiffs initiated t...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT OR GRANT A NEW TRIAL & ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR DISCOVERY
Defendant Francisco Rodriguez (“Rodriguez”) moves the Court to dismiss the indictment or grant a new trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(A) and 28 U.S.C. § 1867(a). (Motion, Docket No. 1190.) The United States (“the Government”) timely opposed. (Government Opposition, Docket No...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff John M. Ferolito (“Ferolito”) brings this diversity action against defendant David K. Menashi (“Menashi”) for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract. Menashi moves under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b), 12(b)(1), and 12(b)(6) to dismiss or stay this action. Ferolito opposes the motion.
I. BACKGROUND
For purposes of this decision, the relevan...
Views: 0
*1214
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Exhaust Tribal Remedies (Docket No. 13).1 On April 17, 2012, United States Magistrate Judge Robert Scott entered an Order (Docket No. 28), which resulted in a stay of all matters until a decision has been issued on the immediate motion to dismiss. In July 2012, both parties file...
Views: 0
ORDER DECLINING TO ADOPT REPORT, GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS, AND CLOSING CASE
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report of Magistrate Judge [DE-19]. In that Report, Magistrate Judge White recommends that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint [DE-17] be granted. Plaintiffs civil rights complaint, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleges that Defendant used excessive force during Plaintif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court are: (1) defendant James McMahon’s motion to dismiss; (2) defendant Gloria Sguros’s motion to dismiss; and (3) the joint motion to dismiss of certain other defendants.1 For the reasons explained below, we deny the defendants’ motions.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as receiver for Broadway Bank (“FDIC-R”), has filed this lawsuit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Life Extension Foundation (“Foundation” or “plaintiff’) brings this *178action against the Internal Revenue Service (“the IRS” or “defendant”) for failure to disclose information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). Plaintiff seeks certain documents from an examination file composed by the IRS’s Tax Exempt and Government Entities Examination Division...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Stephen Rodas, (“Rodas”), brings this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.), the New York State Human Rights Law, and 42 U.S.C. § 19831 against his employer Town of Farmington, (“Farmington” or “the Town”) claiming that he was retaliated against for complaining of discriminati...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This action was commenced by the Plaintiff Patricia Dillon, M.D., M.P.H. (“Dr. Dillon” or “the Plaintiff’) seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, equitable relief, and attorneys’ fees based on the Defendants (1) taking adverse employment actions against her, including but not limited to suspending her from employment without pay and bringing charges again...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Barry S. Korman (“plaintiff’ or “Korman”) seeks relief pursuant to the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) and under common law against UnitedHealthCare Service LLC (“defendant” or “United”).1 Specifically, Korman seeks damages arising from United’s alleged misrepresentation as to the Lifetime Maximum Medical Benefits available to Korman under his emp...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Steven Mack seeks judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision denying Mack’s claim for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) as a person disabled and unable to engage in substantial gainful activity. Both parties move for summary judgment. The issues are (1) whether the ALJ properly weighed the medical opinions, and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION The Canyon County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, which is not a party to this action, filed a motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum served upon it by Plaintiff Jam-ee Wade under Fed.R.Civ.P. 45. Wade’s complaint alleges Fruitland police officer Bill Copeland used excessive force when Copeland shot Wade on December 22, 2011. The subpoena seeks documents i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Michael Trapp worked as a drain operator/metal trades technician for defendant O. Lee, LLC, doing business as Drain Surgeons, LLC. Trapp alleges that defendants failed to pay him for his overtime and “on call” hours, and he brings claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Missouri Minimum Wage Law (MMWL), and Missouri common law. Defendants brought this...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the court on defendant Quality Egg’s motion to dismiss four of five cross claims brought by codefendant Hillandale Farms of Iowa, Inc. (“Hillandale”). (ECF 125.) This motion was decided without a hearing. For the following reasons, Quality Egg’s motion to dismiss is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND ALLEGED FACTS
This case arises out of...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter comes before the court upon defendant Quality Egg’s motion to-dismiss seven of plaintiff NuCal’s eight claims. (ECF 70.) This motion was decided without a hearing. For the following reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.
I. ALLEGED FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This case arises out of a massive recall in August 2010 of shell eggs precipita...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE
Plaintiff and Defendant each move in li-mine for an order precluding the admission of certain evidence at trial. Each motion is addressed below.
A. Plaintiffs Motions in Limine
Motion in Limine No. 1
Plaintiff seeks to “exclud[e] any and all testimony, references to testimony],] or argument based upon the testimony of [Defendant’s human resources expert] Brian H. Klei...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff has brought a pro se employment discrimination action alleging race discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. His complaint names two defendants: Lakewood Management Service, L.L.C. and Richard Brockman.1 The materials filed with plaintiffs complaint indicate that plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on the motion to remand to state court filed by plaintiff, Mitehell-Hollingsworth Nursing & Rehabilitation Center (“Mitchell-Hollingsworth” or “plaintiff’);1 the motion to dismiss the non-ERISA claims in plaintiffs original complaint filed by defendant Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Michigan (“BCBSMichigan”);2 and the motion to dismiss the non-ERISA cla...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS
BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiff Nancy Koehler’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Docket No. 71). After this Court granted Summary Judgment for Defendant Aetna Health Inc. (“Aetna”) (Docket No. 46) on April 29, 2011, Plaintiff appealed the ruling to the Fifth Circuit (Docket No. 48). Following the Fifth Circuit’s ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The defendants filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration on February 12, 2012 (Docket No. 12), which the court denied on November 5, 2012 (Docket No. 75), after also denying a Motion to Remand on June 20, 2012 (Docket No. 40) and a Motion to Conduct Discovery Regarding Arbitration on July 11, 2012 (Docket No. 47).1 Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), the defendants *753have filed a Motion to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On May 19, 2010, Plaintiff Xerox obtained a default judgment against Bentley Graphic Communications (09-cv-4981, Docket No. 9), in the amount of $775,466.15 plus costs. Xerox now brings a suit to enforce that judgment against Defendant Bentley, who personally guaranteed each contract. In its Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 6), Xerox claims that Bentley is not entitled to disc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff The Renfrew Centers, Inc. (“Renfrew”) brings a claim against Defendant UNI/CARE Systems, Inc. (“UNI/ CARE”) for making fraudulent misrepresentations that induced Renfrew to enter into a contract with UNI/CARE. UNI/ CARE moves to dismiss the complaint and compel arbitration pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. Diversity jurisdiction is proper pursuan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant Bank of Blue Valley (“BOBV”)’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay the present proceedings against all parties under the Colorado River doctrine (Doc. 21).1 Plaintiffs filed suit against BOBV, BOBVs Board of Directors, BOBVs holding company Blue Valley Ban Corp. (“Ban Corp.”), and members of Ban Corp.’s Board of Dir...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Robert Hillmann, and Defendant City of Chicago (“City”), have each moved to compel John Sullivan and Jack Drumgould (collectively, “Deponents”) to respond to substantive deposition questions to which Sullivan and Drumgould invoked the Fifth Amendment. For the reasons set forth herein, the motions are granted. BACKGROUND1 In 2005, Deponents worked for the Ci...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER Now pending before the court is the motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to abstain from deciding case, filed by defendants, Sabre, Inc., Sabre Holdings Corporation, and Sabre Travel International, Ltd. d/b/a Sabre Travel Network (collectively, “Sabre”). Plaintiffs, Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (“ICSP”) and Chartis Specialty Insurance Company (“Char...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Chris Geiger brings this action pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1132. On March 9, 2010, Plaintiff moved for judgment on the administrative record (Doc. 47) against Defendant CIGNA Life Insurance Company of New York (“CIGNA-NY”), alleging an unlawful termination of benefits to which she is entitled und...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The case of William Lopez began twenty-three years ago. It was rotten from day one.
In 1989, a man entered a crackhouse in Brooklyn and shot and killed a drug dealer named Elvirn Surria. Lopez was charged with murder for this shooting. After a jury trial before Justice Carolyn Demarest in New York Supreme Court, Lopez was convicted and sentenced to twenty-five years to life in ...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Opinion Order
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 841
II. FACTS........... 842
A. Lauer Limited 842
*841B. Individual Defendants...............................................843
C. Defendant L & L Pork...............................................844
D. Lauer Finishing.....................................................845
E. Coleridge Grain...........................................
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND
ETHICS IN WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1732 (JEB)
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPIN...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
GARDNER BRADLEY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0080 (RJL)
)
UNITED STATES PAROLE )
COMMISSION, et al., )
) F I L E D
Defendants. )
JAN l 7 2013
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
MEMORANDUM PINION Courts for the District of Columbia
January __[_G;, 2013
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Summar...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Roberto Roca-Buigas (“Plaintiff’) brings this action seeking damages stemming from an agreement between himself and Renald Poisson (“Poisson”), the managing member of Clutch Sportz, LLC (“Clutch Sportz”). (See Docket No. 1.) The central dispute revolves around Poisson’s representations to Plaintiff during contract negotiations regarding alleged agreements made betwee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Elinore J. Ruben, a citizen of Pennsylvania, has sued defendants United States of America and Beyer Blinder Belle, P.C. a/k/a Beyer Blinder Bell Architects & Planners LLP (“BBB”), related architectural firms,1 for damages she sustained as a result of an allegedly hazardous condition at the museum at the Ellis Island National Monument in New York City. Plaintiff claims she s...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
This matter comes before the Court on a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), or, alternatively, to strike pursuant to the Louisiana Anti-SLAPP statute, La. C.C.P. art. 971, filed by the defendant, Roger Goodell (“Goodell”). Having considered the record, the memoranda of *593counsel, and the law, the Court has determined that dismissal is appropriate for the following r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before me are three fully briefed motions. For the purposes of clarity, I will list the motions and their accompanying memoranda and briefly summarize the arguments contained in each. First, there is defendant Durkin & Devries Insurance Agency’s motion to dismiss plaintiff First Sealord Surety’s negligent misrepresentation claim (ECF No. 40), First Sealord’s response theret...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Thomas McBride (Plaintiff) brings this action in negligence against National Diagnostics, Inc. (Defendant NDI). Defendant NDI moved for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 56).
I. BACKGROUND1
Plaintiff claims Defendant NDI was negligent in reviewing drug-test results regarding Plaintiffs urine sample. Defendant ND...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
INTERSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY )
COMPANY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AUDREY M. ALBERTS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-1727 (JEB)
HON. DAVID J. KAPPOS,
Under Secretary of Commerce for
Intellectual Property and Director of the
United States Patent and Trademark
Office,
Defendant...
Views: 0
ORDER This case comes before the Court on Defendant Reckitt Benckiser, Inc.’s (“RBI”) motion to exclude the testimony of Plaintiffs’ expert, Richard I. Underwood [31]. I. Background On September 2, 2008, Plaintiffs Dewayne and Christy Kilgore returned to their home to discover that a fire had started in their basement. A subsequent investigation revealed that the fire originated at an outlet in ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Charles Colombe, a shareholder, director, and officer of BBC Entertainment, Inc. (“BBC”) filed a Complaint against Defendants Rosebud Sioux Tribe (“the Tribe”), Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court, and Judge Sherman Marshall (collectively “Defendants”). Doc. 1. B...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL
Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation (“the Tribe”) and Robert Shepherd, the Tribe’s chairman, filed a Complaint for declaratory, injunctive, and other relief. Doc. 1. Plaintiffs named as Defendants United States Corps of Engineers (“the Corps”), Robert J. Ruch (“Ruch”), in his official capacity...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28). After consideration of the briefs, affidavits, depositions, and other materials submitted, the Court grants Defendant’s motion.
I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 requires that summary judgment be granted “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fa...
Views: 0
Paul T. Manza and Domar Homestead, LLC, bring this Section 1983 action against Michael Newhard in both his individual capacity and his official capacity as the Mayor of the Village of Warwick, New York, and also against the Village of Warwick. Plaintiffs allege violations of their substantive and procedural due process rights in connection with the termination of water service to their property. N...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
On January 12, 2012, Diallo Hamadou (“Hamadou”), Muhammad Shahjahan (“Shahjahan”), and Frank Asiedu (“Asiedu”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) brought this action for unpaid wages, including failure to pay overtime compensation, under the Fair Labor Standards Act (the “FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and under the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”), Article 19 § 650 et seq. In the insta...
Views: 0
Page 7668
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )
COMMISSION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 11–1170 (RCL)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
REBECCA R. GRAY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-2188 (JDB)
RAY LAHOOD, Secretary, Department of
Transportation
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINIO...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
MICHAEL A. ANDERSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on an appeal from the Final Judgment and Memorandum Opinion, which were entered by the Bankruptcy Court on May 10, 2012.1 This Court has jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1) and Fed. R. Bankr.P. 8001. For the reasons stated herein, the Bankruptcy Court’s Final Judgment and Memorandum Opinion are affirmed.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND2
Harley ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants City of Milford, City of Milford Police Department and Chief Mark Machan (collectively, “Defendants”). (Doc. 22). Plaintiff Ralph Hodges (“Plaintiff’) has filed his opposition (Doc. 40), and Defendants have filed their reply (Doc. 41). This matter is now ripe for review.
I. BACKGROUND
The facts ar...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Yulanda Hill brings this action against the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS) and Carolyn Walker, Hill’s former supervisor with DHS. Hill alleges numerous claims surrounding her termination by DHS and Walker. Previously, the Court dismissed all of Hill’s claims except for her sex discrimination claim and her claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Re...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LIEUTENANT COLONEL MICHAEL )
D. MORI, USMC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 07-2167 (RJL)
)
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY ) F l L E D
) v
Defendant. ) JAN l 3 2913
!\\~2" clerk u.s r.z»,~:.wcx_s »'zanif€y
MEMORANDUM ()PINI()N Cr)urts mr the D¢stnct 01 Co.umbla
(January @, 2013) [## 29, 301
Before this Court are renewed cross-motions for ...
Views: 0
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge (“Report”) and the objections to the Report, and the Supplemental Report and Recommendation. Good cause appearing, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations contained in the Report after having made a de novo determin...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. # 30); SUSTAINING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. # 17); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. #26); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. # 32); OVERRULING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. # 31); JUDGMENT TO ENTER IN FAVOR OF DEF...
Views: 0
Page 7956
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the motions to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) of defendants Ruben Hernandez-Gregorat, Brenda I. Gomila-Santiago, Harold Cortes-Lacaustra, Vanessa L. CollazoSantiago, and Aaron Hernandez-Martinez, in their individual capacities. (Dockets No. 18, 28 & 40.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS de...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SABINA LOVING, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-385 (JEB)
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
To close a gap in the federal overs...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TETON HISTORIC AVIATION
FOUNDATION, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 09-cv-669 (RLW)
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. Doc. 223. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.1
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Robert Hendricks and Scott Spitler filed this action against Total Quality Logistics (“TQL”) and Kenne...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Govindarajulu Nagaldinne, MD’s Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Plaintiffs Expert Dr. Joel Nitzkin (ECF *713No. 199), Defendant Govindarajulu Nagaldinne, MD’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 200), Defendants George Lombardi, Melody Griffin, and Gale Bailey’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 203), Plaintiffs Motion t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________________
)
LOWELL THOMAS LAKIN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. 11-594
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is this Court’s second Memorandum and Order concerning Jason Ferrell’s Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (Petition). See Ferrell v. Wall, 862 F.Supp.2d 88 (D.R.I.2012) (Ferrell Federal). In his Petition, Mr. Ferrell set forth nine grounds for relief. (ECF No. I.)1 This Court dismissed six of those grounds in response ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
Before the Court is Defendant Continental Services, Inc., (“Continental”) motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay filed on July 19, 2012. See Docket No. 25. Defendant Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Travelers”) joined in the motion on November 1, 2012. See Docket No. 41. The plaintiff, Star Insurance Company (“Star Insurance”), filed a re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(Document Nos. 20 and 2k)
Scott Bellone (“Plaintiff’) brings this three-count action against Southwick-Tolland Regional School District (“Defendant”) alleging violations of the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. Pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiffs amend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Maria Borino brings this action for judicial review of the Social Security Commissioner’s (“the Commissioner”) final decision, as issued in accordance with the ruling of an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) on September 20, 2011, denying her claim for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) and Disability Income Benefits (“DIB”) benefits under Titles II and XIV of the...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT DRS. FORERO AND MAHOMEDY’S MOTIONS TO QUASH SERVICE OF PROCESS AND TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION (D.E. 51, 52), DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO STAY RULING PENDING JURISDICTIONAL DISCOVERY (D.E. 61, 62), AND DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT DRS. FORERO AND MAHOMEDY’S MOTIONS FOR PROTECTIVE ORDERS TO STAY DISCOVERY (D.E. 78, 79) THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF, AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON CROSS-CLAIM
What does “in the aggregate” mean? That is the question in this contract dispute. The case began when a radiology lab leased a medical device. The terms of the lease we...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Donald D. Parkell (“plaintiff”), is a pretrial detainee at the Howard R. Young Correctional Institution (“HRY-CI”), Wilmington, Delaware, who proceeds pro se and has been granted in forma pauperis status. He filed this complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming violations of his constitutional rights.1 (D.I. 3) Plaintiff filed an amended complaint ...
Views: 1
Page 8211
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, Bert Williams, Jr. and Bert Williams, Sr., sued a number of defendants, including Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government (“Louisville Metro”) and more than twenty Louisville Metro police officers (collectively, “Defendants”) over a series of raids and arrests occurring at or near their business, Plaintiff Phat’s Bar & Grill (“Phat’s”). A number of di...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
In her complaint this action, Amy Lynn Willmore-Cochran (“Plaintiff”) brings claims alleging race discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981; interference and retaliation in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.; as well as claims arising under Alabama law for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the court is the Housing Authority of the City of Port Arthur, Texas, (the “Housing Authority”) and Seledenio Quesada’s (“Quesada”) (collectively “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss (# 5). Defendants move for dismissal of Plaintiff Berlinsia Gallentine’s (“Gallentine”) claims for discrimination and retaliation under Title VII, § 1981, and § 1983 on the ground that ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR APPLICATION OF GENERAL MARITIME LAW
Before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Application of General Maritime Law (ECF No. 130). Defendant Sprague Energy Corp. (“Defendant” or “Sprague”) has filed an opposition to the Motion (ECF No. 144) arguing that Maine state law applies with respect to determination of Plaintiffs damages. For reasons explained herein, the Court GRANTS the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Presently before the court is plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (the *409“Motion”) (Doc. No. 2). Defendants filed a Response in opposition thereto (the “Response”) (Doc. No. 22). On January 10, 2013, the parties filed proposed findings of fact (“FF”) and conclusions of law (“Concl. Law”) (Doc. Nos. 26 (Plaintiffs), 27 (Defendants’)). A hearing was held on the M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court are the Defendant Ruby Tuesday’s Motions to Dismiss, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and for Summary Judgment, Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. (ECF Nos. 79, 86). The Motion to Dismiss is premised on the assertion that even when read in the broadest, most “plaintiff friendly” terms, the Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) Complaint is long on legal con...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Presently pending before the Court is the MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULES 12(B)(6) AND 12(F) (Doc. No. 8), filed by Defendant New Kensington-Arnold School District, with brief in support (Doc. No. 9). Plaintiffs, Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc., Doe 1, by Doe l’s Next of Friend and Parent Marie Schaub, who also sues o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF COURT
I.SYNOPSIS
This matter comes before the Court on the Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Counterclaim Defendant Bral Corporation (“Bral”), Keith Dunbar (“Dunbar”), and Christopher Chen (“Chen”) (Doc. Nos. 112; 116; 119). Counterclaimant Johns-town America Corporation (“JAC”) opposes these motions. (Doc. Nos. 127; 129).1 For the reasons that follow, the Court will...
Views: 0
OPINION REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Plaintiff, Charlie Beamon, proceeding pro se, filed a Complaint against Defendants on April 25, 2012, in the 57th District Court of Alegan County, Michigan. Defendants removed the case to this Court on May 8, 2012, alleging federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, on the basis that Plaintiffs claim is governed by the *66...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Randy J. Pidkaminy brought this action pursuant to the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3), seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision denying his application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). See Dkt. No. 1.
Currently before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for judg...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Nautilus Insurance Company’s (“Nautilus”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 41), filed on July 5, 2012. Plaintiff Big-D Construction Corp. (“Big-D”) filed a Response (Doc. # 51) on August 3, 2012. Nautilus filed a Reply (Doc. #54) on August 24, 2012.
Also before the Court is Defendant Century Surety Company’s (“Century”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 55...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE
In this in rem civil forfeiture action, the government seeks to take title to real property, a residence located at 2900 NW 25th Terrace, Boca Raton, Florida.1 See 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A) and (C). The government maintains that the Boca Raton property was purchased by Robert Eremian with proceeds traceable to Sports Of...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the following:
1. Defendant Qualcomm’s Answer to ParkerVision’s First Amended Complaint and Qualcomm’s Counterclaim and Demand for Jury Trial (Doc. No. 91), filed March 16, 2012;
2. Plaintiff ParkerVision, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss and Strike Qualcomm’s Answer to ParkerVision’s First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 100), filed April 9, 2012;
3. Qualcomm’s Memora...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING VERIFIED PETITION FOR RETURN OF CHILD TO THE UNITED KINGDOM
I. Introduction
This matter is currently before the court on Petitioner East Sussex Children Services’ Verified Petition For Return of Child to United Kingdom (“Petition”) [Doc. 1]. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the Petition.
II. Facts and Procedural History
The Court finds the follow...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING BANKRUPTCY COURT’S AUGUST 23, 2012 JUDGMENT VESTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY (TMK 3-7-6-007-019, C.P.R. Nos. 0001 AND 0002) IN DEBTORS AND DEFENDANTS AS JOINT TENANTS
I. INTRODUCTION
Appellants Philip Dylan Henshaw and Kimberly Henshaw (“Appellants”) appeal the “Judgement [sic] Vesting Title to Real Property (TMK 3-7-6-007-019, C.P.R. Nos. 0001 and 0002) in Debtors and Defendants ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Martin Yoselovsky (‘Toselovsky”) brings this suit against his former *265employer, The Associated Press (“AP”), contending that the AP terminated him because he requested accommodations so that he could observe the weekly Jewish Sabbath and other religious holidays. Yoselovsky seeks relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON MICHAEL CHOI’S CLAIMS
I. INTRODUCTION
On April 26, 2011, Plaintiff Michael Choi, along with Michael Scholten, Jessica M. Kramer, and Alexsandra Del Real (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed their First Consolidated Amended Complaint (“FCAC”), seeking to represent a nationwide class of purchasers of the 2010 Toyota Prius and Lexus HS 250h hyb...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiffs John and Cindy Segerberg allege that Defendant Pipe Fitters’ Welfare Fund, Local 597, violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., when it stopped providing medical benefits to the Segerbergs.1 The Segerbergs also allege two Illinois state-law claims stemming from this failure to provide benefits, as well a...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Karen Palmer brings this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that she was retaliated against by defendants, the Pen-field (New York) Central School District (“District”) and Penfield superintendent John Carlevatti. Plaintiff alleges that in 2009, she was denied tenure and was compell...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The present action was initiated by the Plaintiffs Lisa Morales Firestone (the “Plaintiff” or “Firestone”) and her husband Scott Craig Firestone in state court, which was subsequently removed to this Court by the Defendants — the Board of Education of the Manhasset Union Free School District (the “Board”) and the Manhasset Union Free School District (collectively ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs BGC Partners, Inc. and G & E Acquisition Company, LLC (together “BGC”) have moved to remand this case to state court or, alternatively, for this Court to abstain. They argue that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the parties are not diverse and all the claims arise under state law.1 Moreover, plaintiffs argue, even if federal jurisd...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Attorney Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (1996) (“EAJA”). [D.E. 17]. Defendant has responded [D.E. 19], and Plaintiff has replied [D.E. 20]. This matter is now ripe for decision. Plaintiff has moved this Court for an award of attorney fees and costs against Defendant at a fee of § 140.00 per hour, allegedly...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S FED. R. CRIM. P. 29 MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL AND AFFIRMING BENCH RULINGS DENYING MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND SUPPRESS I. INTRODUCTION The following recaps and reaffirms the Court’s rulings on Defendant Jason Parker’s (“Defendant’s”) motions to suppress and to dismiss and constitutes its statement of decision on Defendant’s motion for acquittal. II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On August 23,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On May 30, 2008, Sunlight Electrical Contracting Co., Inc. (“Sunlight”), brought this case in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. Notice of Removal, Ex. B. Sunlight, a construction subcontractor, sought $1,034,581.80 for alleged non-payment of fees for construction services it provided to the defendants.
The defendants removed to this Court, asserting fede...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on motions to dismiss filed by Defendants *1263City of West Miami (D.E. 8), City of Miami (D.E. 16), the School Board of MiamiDade Comity and Officer Angel Rodriguez (D.E. 20), Officer Edgar Diaz (D.E. 21), Officers Walter Lewis and Jay Desai (D.E. 22), and Officer Marco A. Caceres (D.E. 40).
THE COURT has considered the motions and the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER I. Introduction In the continuing saga of disputes in this matter, Philips moved, prior to and during a status conference held on December 18, 2012, to limit the number of claims asserted by Masimo in both Masimo I and Masimo II, which Masimo opposed.1 During that teleconference, both sides were allowed to present argument on the issue, as well as, additional written submissions...
Views: 0
ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................869
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY...............................................869
III. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION.....................................869
IV. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD ....................................869
V. RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND...................................870
A. Parties.......
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Cheryl L. Hutchinson filed this suit on June 7, 2011, raising seven claims for relief. (Pl.’s Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) After the dismissal stage, Plaintiff has three claims remaining against both Defendant Dennis Phillips and Defendant City of Oklahoma City (“City”): (1) Count IV, which alleges a violation of equal protection, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1...
Views: 0
ORDER ON JURISDICTION
This is an employment-discrimination case. The plaintiff asserts he was fired in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act and in retaliation for filing a worker’s-compensation claim. The plaintiff filed the case in state court. The defendant removed the case to this court. The removal of the worker’s-compensation-retaliation claim raises a jurisdictional issue. See 28...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiff Lenore B. Grogan, proceeding pro se, brings this Section 1983 action against Blooming Grove Volunteer Ambulance Corporation (“BGVAC”) and Carole McCann, Chair of BGVAC’s board of directors,1 alleging violations of her constitutional rights under the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Plaintiff also brings claims for defamation under New York state law.
Before...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff investors in Diagnostic Ventures, Inc. (DVI) sue for violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and Rule 10b-5, *50117 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5,1 and imposition of liability under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78t(a). Jurisdiction is the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa, and federal question, 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
Defendant T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Jamar Clanton, Brian Fritzler, and Jonathan Meyers (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action against VCNA Prairie, Inc. (“Prairie”) and Richard Olsen asserting violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“IMWL”), 820 111. Comp. Stat. 105/1 et seq., and the Illinois Prevailing Wage Act (...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 05-0386 (ESH)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on All Counts of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 288], Plaintiff Custom Hardware Engineering & Consulting, Inc.’s (“CHE”) Motion for Summary Judgment as to Counts III through VI of CHE’s Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 302], and CHE’s Motion to *920Strike Declaration of John Dowell ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This action involves claims under M.G.L.c. 93A and 176D. Plaintiff Donald Bohn (“Bohn”) alleges that defendant Vermont Mutual Insurance Company (“Ver*141mont Mutual”) violated M.G.L.C. 176D when it failed to settle plaintiffs claim after liability became reasonably clear.
The Court presided over a three-day bench trial in early January, 2013. The Court now publishes its fin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
The plaintiff Bondholders (the “Bondholders”) in this case are suing U.S. Bank National Association (“U.S. Bank”), their indenture trustee, for its actions during the bond’s default, and subsequent sale of the mortgage securing the bonds. Am. Compl. (“Compl.”), ECF No. 7. The plaintiffs bring seven claims in contract and tort: breach of contract, breach of the implied...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R & R) issued by Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo on November 29, 2012 (Doc. 121). The magistrate judge recommended that: 1) the Receiver’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 97) be granted and that the Clerk be directed to enter judgment for the Receiver and against Dancing $ in the amount of...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R & R) issued by Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo on December 17, 2012 (Doc. 70). The magistrate judge recommended that: 1) the Receiver’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 53) be granted and that the Clerk be directed to enter judgment for the Receiver and against Cloud in the amount of $763...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are the following motions: (1) defendant Whitney Bank’s motion to vacate, or in the alternative modify,1 an arbitration award rendered in favor of plaintiff Richard Bain (“Bain”); (2) Bain’s motion to confirm the arbitration award;2 and (3) Whitney Bank’s motion to stay Bain’s petition to confirm the arbitration award.3 For the reasons set forth below, Bain’s mo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Following the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (or “ACA”) in March of 2010, group health plans and health insurance issuers not otherwise grandfathered under the Act are required to provide coverage for certain preventive health services — including FDA approved “contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with repro...
Views: 2
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R & R) issued by Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo on December 17, 2012 (Doc. 124). The magistrate judge recommended that: 1) the Receiver’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 90) be granted and that the Clerk be directed to enter judgment for the Receiver and against Morgan in the amount of $8...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Defendants’ motions to dismiss. (Doc. No. 7, 8, 9, 10, 15). Plaintiff opposes the motions. (Doc. No. 18,19, 20, 21). I. Standard of Review In deciding a motion to dismiss, the district court is required to view the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See Murphy v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp., 208 F.3d 959, 962 (11th Cir.2000) (citin...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is before the Court on a Report and Recommendation and an Order issued by the Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge, on October 11, 2012, 2012 WL 6923800. In the *1009Report and Recommendation, the magistrate judge recommended that Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment and for permanent or temporary injunction injunction [Docket No: 5] be granted in pa...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendant Mrs. Gooch’s Natural Food Market, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”), filed September 7, 2012. Plaintiff Vincent Hollister (“Plaintiff’) filed his memorandum in opposition on December 13, 2012, and Defendant filed its reply on December 19, 2012. This matter came on for hearing on Januar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) case is before the Court on De*837fendant BDP International, Inc.’s (“BDP”) Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #33] and Defendants BDP, Elite Group, Inc., Elite International -Transportation, Inc., Elite Brokerage Services, Inc.,- and ETS Express, Inc.’s (collectively “Defendants”) Motions to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration as to Opt-in ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this civil forfeiture action, Claimants petition this Court for the return of $25,000.00 of their seized property (the Defendants, in rem) each month until trial. Alternatively, they seek an evidentiary hearing on the merits of the Government’s case. Claimants’ Pet. Return Seized Property, Dkt. 57. The Government opposes both requests. Because the Court holds that Claimants d...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PARTIAL DISMISSAL AND LEAVE TO AMEND
Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause, alleging Defendants’ failure to perform, under the parties’ Mortgage Loan Purchase and Servicing Agreement, proper mortgage servicing on multiple pools of mortgage loans sold by Defendants to Plaintiff Encore Bank, N.A. (“Encore”), is a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of ...
Views: 2
Page 9141
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System (“IPERS”) brings this action against Deloitte & Touche LLP (“D & T”). The claims in this case arise out of D & T’s audits of its client, registered broker-dealer WG Trading Company, LP (“WGTC”). IPERS alleges violations of § 10(b) of the Exchange Act (“the '34 Act”), pursuant to SEC Rule 10b-5, and breach of fiduciary duty,...
Views: 0
Opinion and Order
Plaintiffs Michael Marcavage, Repent America, an unincorporated association by and through its Director, Michael Marcavage, Shawn Holes and Don Earns (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action, asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for violations of their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and under Article I...
Views: 0
FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 2 3 2013
Cl k, U. . `
Go:rrts fo?thgi§tf:(t:rtig §§
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal Action No. 12-150 (JEB)
KEVIN HUSSAIN HOMAUNE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION & RESTITUTION ORDER
Defendant Kevin Homaune pled guilty to and has been sentenced for attempted
international parental kidnapping. The Govemment now seeks restit...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS Before the Court is Defendant Noetic Specialty Insurance Company’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint, filed August 9, 2012. (Doc. No. 3.) For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Background Defendant provided liability insurance coverage to Electric Mobility Corporation...
Views: 0
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 69) and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 59). These motions were heard with oral argument on January 10, 2013. Plaintiff was represented by Patrick J. Kirby. Defendants were represented by James M. Kalamon. The Court has reviewed the briefing and the record and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Currently pending before the Court is a motion for summary judgment [Doc. 13], filed by defendant HUB Enterprises, Inc. (“HUB”), whereby defendant seeks dismissal of all claims asserted against it by plaintiff Alisa Claiborne. [Id., see also Docs. 13-1; 13-3, p. 6]
I.Background
Plaintiff brought this suit, alleging her employer engaged in unlawful discrimination in violation o...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Frank Molinaro, seeks reimbursement of benefits due to him under his long term disability policy with defendant, The UPS Health & Welfare Package, which is administered by defendant Aetna Life Insurance Company. The long term disability plan at issue is an employee welfare benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (hereinafter “ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 10...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 21). Plaintiff has filed a memorandum in opposition (Doc. 24), and Defendants have filed their reply (Doc. 25). This matter is now ripe for review.
I. BACKGROUND
On May 19, 2011, Plaintiff Karen Smith (“Plaintiff’) filed a Complaint against Hamilton County, Hamilton County Board of County Commissioners, and Hamilton C...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9345: Southeastern Pennsylvania Transp. Auth. v. Bank of New York Mellon Corp.
Page 9345
OPINION
The Bank of New York Mellon (“BNY Mellon”) acted for the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) under a Master Trust Agreement (the “MTA”), principally as a custodian for securities of pension and other funds managed for SEPTA by other investment managers. From time to time, BNY Mellon and a predecessor provided foreign exchange (“FX”) services, exchanging dollars fo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________________
)
PAULETTE ANGUIMATE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR TRANSFER TABLE OF CONTENTS I.INTRODUCTION........................................................976 A. ■ Factual Background.................................................976 B. Procedural Background..............................................977 II.LEGAL ANALYSIS......................................................978 A....
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Regions Bank’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 12), to which Plaintiffs Derek Pereira and Camila De Freitas (“Plaintiffs”) filed a Response in opposition (Doc. No. 17). With leave of Court, Defendants filed a Reply (Doc. No. 25) to that Response. I. BACKGROUND The facts of this case are simple: at some point, Plaintiffs each cashed a c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Cherokee Insurance Company’s (Cherokee) “Supplemental Brief in Support of Summary Judgment.” (Docket No. 99.) In its previous Memorandum Opinion and contemporaneous Order entered on June 1, 2011, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants Cherokee and Durarock Reinsurance, Ltd.1 (Docket Nos. 83; 84.) Plaintiff Ramona...
Views: 0
ORDER
On July 17, 2012, plaintiff filed a complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, alleging gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation, all in violation of New York State law, as well as other state law claims. On the basis of his third claim, which alleges that he experienced “retaliatory behavior” after filing a complaint against defendan...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GEORGE W. BURNS, III, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 10-1686 (RC)
:
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEBRA L. HARTLEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1185 (JEB)
OFFICER WILFERT, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On July 20, 2009, following a 225-mile trek from ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court is a Motion by Defendant General Refractories Company (“GRC”) for Judgment on the Pleadings on Plaintiff Jeffrey Perelman’s (“Jeffrey”) Second Amended Complaint. (Docket No. 106). Also before the Court is a similar Motion filed by Defendants Raymond Perelman (“Raymond”) and Jason Guzek (“Guzek”). (Docket No. 107). After those Motions were filed, Jeffrey fil...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Mizrain Gonzalez (“movant”) is a federal inmate currently confined at F.C.I. Marianna, in Florida. Movant filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (D.I. 30) Respondent filed a response in opposition. (D.I. 36) For the reasons discussed, the court will deny movant’s § 2255 motion as time-barred without holding an evid...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Counterclaim Defendants Custom Hardware Engineering, Inc. (“CHE”) and David York’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Counts I, II, III, and IV of Counterclaim Plaintiff Jonathan Dowell’s Counterclaim Directed Against Counterclaim Defendants [ECF No. 299], and CHE’s Motion to Strike Portions of Declaration of Jonathan Dowell [ECF No. 332...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the Court in this nearly forty-eight-year-old school desegregation case is Defendant Cleveland School District’s proposed plan [44] in response to the Court’s March 28, 2012 Order [42] directing the District to submit a proposed plan to farther integrate East Side High School and D.M. Smith Middle School, and to achieve racial balance among its faculty distri...
Views: 4
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
Presently before the court is defendant Wynn Las Vegas, LLC’s motion to dismiss plaintiff Gina Dannenbring’s second amended class action complaint. (Doc. # 24). Plaintiff responded (doc. # 30), and defendant replied (doc. # 31). Defendant filed for leave to supplement its motion to dismiss. (Doc. # 35). Plaintiff filed a non-opposition to defendant’s filing of the s...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs Jennifer Vuona, Sara Hudson, Julia Kuo, and Catherine Wharton (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring suit against defendants Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., and Bank of America Corporation (collectively, “ML”), alleging that their employment was unlawfully terminated on the basis of gender, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rig...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
Criminal No. 12-65 (CKK)
PAUL DAVID HITE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(January 24, 2013)
Defend...
Views: 0
RULING
Before the Court are the Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Officer Clifton Fairbanks, the City of Alexandria, and former Chief of the Alexandria Police Department Darren Coutee. (Docs. 77, 79). Also before the Court is a Motion to Strike filed by Defendants regarding the expert testimony of Dr. Charles Kelly. (Doc. 86). All responses have been filed, and these matters are ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case sought review, under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying plaintiff s applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. On September 6, 2012, this Court reversed the decision of the Commissioner and remanded the action to the Commissioner for further proceedings. Opinio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
In their Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs allege violations of (1) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”); (2) 42 U.S.C. § 1983; (3) the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (“FLSA”); (4) the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 P.S. § 955 et seq. (“PHRA”); and (5) the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, 43 P.S. § 333 et...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support (ECF No. 23), Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 30), Appendix to Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31), and Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 33). Having considered the motion, the rela...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion to strike pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) (“Rule 12(f)”) and defendant the Puerto Rico Ports Authority’s (“PRPA”) motion for a protective order. (Docket Nos. 185 and 193, respectively.) Having considered the plaintiffs’ motion, (Docket No. 185), the defendants’ response, (Docket No. 193), and the plaintiffs’ reply to defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, Sheba Rhodes, asserts claims against defendant, The Arc of Madison County, Inc., for wrongful termination in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. (“FMLA”), and for negligent hiring, training, supervision, and retention in violation of state law. This action is before the court on three motions filed by defendant: i.e., a mot...
Views: 0
ORDER
This action arises from an insurance coverage dispute. It is before the Court on Plaintiffs Shawn Moon and Tanya Moon’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. 23] and Defendant The Cincinnati Insurance Company’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 27]. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs Shawn Moon and Tanya Moon’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. 23] is GRANTED IN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Plaintiff, Redner’s Markets, Inc. (“Redner’s”), operates a chain of grocery stores, one of which is located in the Joppatowne Plaza Shopping Center. In this case, Redner’s sues its landlord, Joppatowne G.P. Limited Partnership (“Joppatowne”), for breach of a restrictive covenant found in its lease. This Court has diversity jurisdiction over the dispute because R...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHELIA S. BOWE-CONNOR,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-2032 (JDB)
ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veteran
Affairs
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Shelia S. Bow...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
YING QING LU, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1815 (JEB)
MARK LEZELL, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are two entities and two in...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP )
OF WASHINGTON, et al., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ briefs regarding whether the Court should partially lift the stay it granted on October 25, 2010 and proceed to adjudicate the complaint 1 filed by Cape Bruny Tankschiffarts GmbH and Co. KG and Cape Bruny Shipping Company Ltd., as owner and bare-boat charterer of the M/T Cape Bruny (collectively referred to as “Cape Bruny”) for exoneration fr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), filed by defendants Sandoz, Inc. (Sandoz) and Eon Labs, Inc. (Eon). Plaintiffs Frederick and Barbara Arters bring this five-count complaint alleging negligence, violation of the Ohio Products Liability Act, breach of implied warranty, and fraud.1 Doc. 4 ...
Views: 0
Page 10374
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff, an inmate in the custody of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (“DOCS”), brings this action against DOCS and approximately fifty of its officials and employees (collectively “defendants”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq. (“RLUIPA”). Plaintiff claims that during h...
Views: 0
Page 10406
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Paul Richard Payne, an inmate at the Utah State Prison, filed this pro se civil rights suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2012). Plaintiff was allowed to proceed informa pauperis. See 28 id. 1915 (2012). The court is considering Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs seventeen-count original Complaint (Doc. No...
Views: 0
OPINION AND FINAL ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the bench trial held from December 8, 2012 through December 21, 2012 in Key West and Miami, Florida.
This case is the legal finale to a three year opera with a stunning libretto: two friends followed a treasure map to a hoard of gems on the floor of the Gulf of Mexico, then braved an onslaught of investor disputes and accusations of...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendants, Operadora Anderson’s, S.A. de C.V. (“Operadora”) and Palangana, S.A. de C.V.’s (“Palangana[’s]”) (sometimes collectively referred to as the “Señor Frog’s Defendants[’]”) Renewed Combined Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs Complaint Pursuant to the Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine (“Motion”) [ECF No. 247], filed on October 23, 2012. Upon the parti...
Views: 0
*1001ORDER
Before the Court are two Motions filed by Donna Hinton (“Plaintiff’): 1) a Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), filed November 21, 2012 (Clerk’s No. 9); and 2) a Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint, also filed November 21, 2012 (Clerk’s No. 8). The Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”) filed a resistance to the Motions on N...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________
)
CARL T. WOOLRIDGE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-539 (RWR)
)
PO...
Views: 2
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss (R. Doc. 5) filed by all Defendants. For the following reasons, the Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. This Court possesses subject matter jurisdiction and therefore may adjudicate the instant dispute. The Motion is granted, however, insofar as Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accord...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On December 18, 2009, the plaintiffs, Thomas Lee and Gloria Lee, filed a complaint seeking to compel coverage and recover damages as the result of an alleged breach of an insurance contract by the defendant, the AIG Casualty Company. The plaintiffs claim that the defendant failed to properly notify them of the cancellation of their automobile insurance pursuant ...
Views: 0
ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER’S AND RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS, ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO VACATE, GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO STRIKE, AND STRIKING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT
For Petitioner Robert Ocampo’s involvement in a drug trafficking conspiracy, a jury convicted him of various drug and firearm offenses. This Court sentenced ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
. On September 10, 2012, Magistrate Judge Joan M. Azrack issued a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) in which she recommended that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted, dismissing all claims brought in this action by plaintiff Laura Anne Bezuidenhout. On October 4, 2012, plaintiff made timely objections to the R & R. After careful and de novo review of the re...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RICHARD LUBOW, et al.
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 10-0510 (JDB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
et al.
Defendants.
M...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LG DISPLAY CO. LTD., :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11–1637 (RC)
:
v. : ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CHARITA DOUGLAS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-429 (JEB)
CHARIOTS FOR HIRE, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 19, 2012, Plaintiff Charita Douglas, a ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 10, 2011, Karla'Malave Torres (“Plaintiff’) filed suit against Jose Cusido (“Cusido”), Sterling Foods, Inc. (“Sterling”) and unnamed insurance companies (collectively “Defendants”), alleging she was discriminated against due to her pregnancy. (See Docket No. 1.) Currently before the court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (Docket No. 50.) Plaintiff opposed the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER OF TRANSFER
Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause, arising out of Plaintiff Charles R. Clemons and Patricia Clemons’ investment in a project to purchase land, construct, and sell townhomes in Phoenix, Arizona, and alleging breach of partnership agreement, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and fraudulent inducement, violation of the Texas Securities Act, Texas Re...
Views: 0
Memorandum Adopting Report and Recommendation re Indefiniteness of '884, '651, & '715 Patents
This matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, and he has recommended that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of indefindteness regarding United States Patent No. 6,271,884, U.S. Patent No. 6,838,651, and U.S. Patent No. 6,838,715 be granted in part and...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
GREGORY O. DAVIS, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 08-447 (RWR)
)
TIMOTHY F. GE...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS
This is an employment dispute about compensation for extra time worked. Plaintiff Patricia Cavallaro, on behalf of herself and all other employees similarly situated, brought suit against various re*143lated hospitals and health-care providers and two healthcare executives. She contends that defendants employ a variety of policies to deny employ...
Views: 0
*353
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This lawsuit was initiated by Plaintiff, the duly appointed representative of the Estate of Regina Ezell, deceased, on May 29, 2012. (Complaint, doe. 1). Ms. Ezell died on September 19, 2010, while she was incarcerated as a pretrial detainee in the Anniston City Jail. (Id.). Plaintiff alleges that the City of Anniston and certain of its employees were deliberat...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. # 44), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommend...
Views: 0
Page 10960
ORDER
This case arises from a custody dispute between the divorced parents of two minor children who are currently living in Hanover, New Hampshire. Ismail Ozgur Ya-man, the children’s father, was granted custody of both children by a Turkish court. He has filed a petition here seeking an order requiring that the children be returned to Turkey pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspec...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a copyright and trademark dispute, for the most part. Before the court is Stevo Design, Inc., Steven Budin, and Alan Rolli’s (“Plaintiffs’ ”) motion to alter or amend judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) (# 49 ).1 Defendant *1116SBR Marketing Ltd. (“SBR”) has opposed this motion (# 50), and Plaintiffs have replied (# 51).
1. Facts and Procedural History
Plaintiff S...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, which was filed on September 14, 2012. (ECF No. 49.) Plaintiff responded in opposition on October 19, 2012. (ECF No. 53.) Defendant replied in support on November 2, 2012. (ECF No. 57.) For the reasons stated below, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 49) is GRANTED. I. ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Pending before the Court are defendants’ motions to dismiss, stay or transfer this action. Defendants — Key Bank, N.A. (“Key Bank”) and Josephine Wisniewski (collectively “Key Bank defendants”), and Joel Brown — seek relief because this action is directly related to actions already pending in state and federal courts in Michigan. For the reasons tha...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On December 30, 2011, after a jury trial, defendant Courtney Dupree (“Dupree”), the owner and CEO of GDC Acquisitions, LLC (“GDC”), and a number of wholly owned subsidiaries, was convicted of (1) conspiracy to commit bank fraud, (2) bank fraud, and (3) two counts of making a false statement in connection with a complex multi-million dollar scheme to defraud Amalgamated Bank...
Views: 0
Page 11168
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Kenith A’Gard, brings this action against the following defendants: Superintendent Perez, Lieutenant Buys, Sergeant Candidus, Corrections Officer Sanin, Director of Special Housing Units/Inmate Disciplinary Program Prack, former Deputy Commissioner Leclaire, and Commissioner Fischer (collectively, “the defendants”).1 Each of the individual defendants is or was a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Exelixis, Inc. (“Exelixis”) has sued David J. Kappos, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), under 35 U.S.C. § 154 and the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., claiming that the PTO improperly determined the amount of patent term adjustment (“PTA”) to which one of Exelixis’s patents is entitled. Before the Co...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. No. 98].
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Gerald A. McHale, Jr., P.A., Liquidation Trustee for 1031 Debtors Liquidation Trust (“Trustee” or “Plaintiff’), brings this legal malpractice action against Defendant Silicon Valley Law Group (“SVLG” or “Defendant”). The Trustee asserts SVLG was negligent in conducting d...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
I. INTRODUCTION
On November 5, 2012, Plaintiffs Pension Plan for Pension Trust Fund for Operating Engineers (“Fund”) and F.G. Crosthwaite and Russell E. Burns as trustees (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint seeking money judgment against Defendants Weldway Construction, Inc. (“...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : Civil Action 11-459 (GK)
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending before the Court in the above referenced action alleging breach of contract (loan modification agreement), wrongful foreclosure of Plaintiffs Tekelia Archer Gossett and Christopher Todd Gos-sett’s home located at 7659 Alcomita Drive, Houston, Texas 77083, failure to provide proper notice of acceleration of loan and of default and time to cure in vio...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404
On January 23, 2013, the Court heard Defendant’s Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (“Motion”). Michael K Burke, Esq., appeared at the hearing on behalf of Selene-Mateos, Noe Montemayor and Fernando Cedillo (“Plaintiffs”); James M. Cleary, Jr., Esq., appeared at the hearing- on behalf of Select En...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MANUEL GUDIEL GARCIA, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )...
Views: 0
ORDER
On October 1, 2012, plaintiff Joy Hickman (hereinafter “Hickman”) filed a motion to alter, amend or vacate order on motion for summary judgment and motion to remand. On October 18, 2012, defendant, Alpine Asset Management Group, L.L.C. (hereinafter “Alpine”), filed suggestion in opposition. Plaintiff filed a reply in support of her motion on November 5, 2012.
Hickman’s motion argues that ...
Views: 0
Page 11471
MEMORANDUM RULING
Pending before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge [Rec. Doc. 379], on blanket motions to dismiss filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) by HESS CORPORATION F/K/A AMERADA HESS CORPORATION, CONOCO PHILLIPS CO., SOUTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, EL PASO FIELD SERVICES MANAGEMENT INC.,1 ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Roosevelt Watkins (“Watkins”), a Lieutenant in the Division of Fire Suppression (“Suppression Division”) of the Montgomery Fire Department (“MFD”), brings this collective action pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 207(a) (hereinafter “FLSA” or the “Act”), against his employer, the City of Montgomery (the “City”), seeking overtime compensation to wh...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Carlos Teran brings this lawsuit against GB International, S.P.A. (“GB International”) and GB Miami, S.R.L. (“GB Miami”) (collectively “Defendants”), asserting claims for breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with a business relationship, unfair competition, declaratory relief, and breach of contract.1 After Defendants moved to dismiss his Complaint on j...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CONSERVATION FORCE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 10-CV-1262 (BJR)
v.
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION ON
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALLEGRA HEMPHILL,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-279 (CKK)
v.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(January 29, 2013)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. [ECF No. 16] The motion is fully briefed and ready for disposition. With leave of Court, the American Center for Law & Justice and Seventy-Nine Members of the United States Congress have filed an amici curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs regarding their opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (Doc. No....
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STAND UP FOR CALIFORNIA!, et al.,
Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 12-2039 (BAH)
v.
Consolidated with:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Civil Act...
Views: 0
RULING RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS FILED BY RELIEF DEFENDANT ANGELINA STRANO (DOC. NO. 109), THE LEADCLICK DEFENDANTS (DOC. NO. 155), AND RICHARD CHIANG (DOC. NO. 179) I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) and the State of Connect*272icut (the “State”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”), commenced this action- by filing under seal a Complaint For Permanent Injunction And Other ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant, Waffle House Inc. (“Waffle House”)’s Motion to Dismiss or Stay the Proceedings and Compel Arbitration. (Rec. Doc. 19) Plaintiff, Charmaine Anderson, has opposed the motion. (Rec. Doc. 23) Waffle House has replied. (Rec. Doc. 32) The motion was set for hearing on the briefs on Wednes*687day, January 2, 2013.1 In its motion, Waffle House seeks an o...
Views: 0
Page 11675
ORDER: (1) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 34); (2) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE; AND (3) CLOSING THIS CASE
This is a pro se consent case presently before the Court upon Defendant’s unopposed motion to dismiss pursuant to Civil Rule 37 for Plaintiffs failure to make any discovery disclosures and cooperate in discovery. Doc. 34. This matter is also before the Court,...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Seaport Marine, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 11) and Odyssea Marine Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 14).1 Both Motions have been briefed and are now ripe.
I. Relevant Background.
Plaintiff, Wilbur Smith, for himself and on behalf of others similarly situated, filed a multi-count Complaint (doc. 1) against defendants, Seaport Marine, Inc. and Odyssea Ma...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On November 29, 2012, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with copies to counsel, his Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The time within which to file objections expired on December 17, 2012, and no objections have been filed. The Magistrate Judge notified the parties that failure to object would w...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM AND GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO STRIKE THIS MATTER is before the Court on Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.’s Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses 2-16 and Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim [DE-29]. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (RCCL) filed this action for exoneration or limitation of liability after Respondents Darren Jackson and Susan Moravec were injure...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction [ECF No. 33], filed by Defendant Brian Elenson (“Elenson”), and the Motions to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim [ECF Nos. 8, 32], filed by Defendants Atlas Media Corporation (“Atlas Media”), Bruce David Klein (“Klein”), Time Warner Inc. (“Time Warner”), Turner Broadcastin...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [docket # 26].
Facts
The plaintiff, Bernard Hallmon, is an African-American man who was employed as a general store manager by Advance Auto Parts, Inc. (“Advance”). Mr. Hallmon was initially hired in April 2004 by Advance for a store located in Georgia. In April 2006, Mr. Hallmon resigned his position but applied for...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff William Ragen (who does business as Ragen Associates) spent twenty years as a manufacturer’s representative, selling pipe and related drainage products made by defendant Hancor, Inc. During those years, the relationship evolved and changed in several ways. The parties started with a written contract in 1988 and updated it in writing in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court are the following Motions: Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss; Defendants’ Motion to Strike Surreply; and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Surreply. The Court has reviewed the record and deems a hearing unnecessary. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN *671PART Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Str...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER1
This matter is before the Court upon the motion of the post-Supplemental Relief Order Complaint Administrator, Mark Vogel, to compel the testimony of Doris Gershon (“Motion to Compel”) (doc. # 3036). For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the Motion to Compel.
I.
In 1972, Defendant Cook County (the “County”) entered into a consent decree, which prohibited ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant J. Davis Architects, PLLC’s (“J. Davis”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. ECF No. 51. Plaintiffs filed a response, ECF No. 53, and Defendants filed a Reply, ECF No. 56. The Court heard argument on the motion on January 15, 2013, and the matter is now ripe for decision. The sole issue raised by the pending motion is whether ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss)
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22), filed on December 12, 2012. Both parties have filed detailed memoranda supporting their respective positions. The Court heard argument and orally issued its ruling on the Motion on January 15, 2013. For the reasons stated below, the Motion was granted.
I. BA...
Views: 0
RULING RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 29) and PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 30)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff A.T. Clayton & Co. (“A.T. Clayton”), a Connecticut paper products company, brings this action against defendant Donald Hachenberger for breach of a personal guaranty. Hachenberger filed this Motion for Partial Summary Judgment *260(“Hachenber...
Views: 1
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Federal Defendant’s Motion to Limit Review to the Administrative Record, docket no. 101. Intervenor Defendants join in the motion in part, docket no. 105. Having reviewed all papers filed in support of, and in opposition to, the pending motion, the Court enters the following Order.
I. Background
This case arises from litigation that occurred between 200...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF ISLAND COLONY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON CLAIMS ASSERTED IN THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
I. INTRODUCTION.
There is no dispute that, on January 13, 2009, while staying at the Island Colony Hotel in Hawaii, Jun Sung Kwak drowned in the swimming pool there. See Deposition of Robert Bird (Oct. 26,2011), ECF No. 160-30, Jan. 13, 2012; Third Amended Co...
Views: 0
Order Denying Motion of Monster, Inc. for Summary Judgment And Granting Motion of Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation For Partial Summary Judgment
Plaintiff Monster, Inc. (“Monster”) filed its operative amended complaint for declaratory relief September 4, 2012 (“FAC,” Dkt. No. 42) seeking a judicial declaration that the Monster Headphone Mark does not infringe any trademark rights of Defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The petitioners are family members and the estates of seventeen U.S. Air Force servicemembers killed in the 1996 terrorist attacks on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. They seek to enforce a judgment against the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Iranian Ministry of Information and Security, and the Iranian Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, all of which were found by the United S...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On November 9, 2012, after a 12-day trial, a jury rendered a verdict in favor of all plaintiffs1 against defendants Carlos Sustache-Sustache (“Sustache”), Zulma Diaz (“Diaz”), and Javier Pagan-Cruz (“Pagan”), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“section 1983”) and article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141 (“article 1802”).2 The Court entered judgment o...
Views: 0
Page 12112
OPINION This case is before the court for ruling on the Motion for Relief from Judgment and Request for Court to Decline Supplemental Jurisdiction (# 112) filed by Plain*920tiffs, Jane Doe-2, through her mother and next friend, Julie Doe-2, and Julie Doe-2. This court has carefully considered Plaintiffs’ Motion, the Objection (# 114) filed by Defendants McLean County Unit District No. 5 Board of...
Views: 0
OPINION REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff, Bridget Powell-Kirby, brought this claim against Defendant, Spectrum Health, for violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., alleging Defendant terminated her employment because she filed a Charge of Discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER At the conclusion of a bench trial in February of 2005, petitioner Brandon Wyatt was convicted of first degree murder and attempted armed robbery and sentenced to consecutive terms of thirty-six and six years of incarceration for the July 17, 1999, shooting of Metra train ticket agent Wilbert Hooten. Petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence without success i...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WALTER L. JACKSON, JR.,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 10-1861 (BJR)
v.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
RAY MABUS, Secretary of the Navy,
...
Views: 0
DECISION & ORDER
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Plaintiffs Lee Valley Tools, Ltd., Veritas Tools, Inc. (Canada) and Veritas Tools, Inc. (USA) (collectively “Veritas”) have sued defendant Industrial Blade Company (“IBC”) *257for false advertising and unfair competition in connection with IBC’s manufacture and sale of hand plane blades. (Docket # 1 at ¶ 1). For many years until 2009, IBC supplied blades...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
The plaintiff labor unions represent workers at the Goshen, Indiana, plant of Cequent Performance Products, Inc., f/k/a Cequent Towing Products. The Unions filed suit in this court seeking a status quo injunction to prevent Cequent from moving its Goshen operations to Reynosa, Mexico, until the parties can arbitrate the issue of whether Cequent’s move to Mexico is a violation ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action “to vindicate the constitutional rights of ... Vincent L. Ro*551well,” who died in the Walker County Jail on October 6, 2009, allegedly as a result of injuries received in the custody of law enforcement officers.1 Plaintiffs are Linda Rowell and Victor Pickett, the parents of the decedent, and Horacia Pickett, the personal representative of his estat...
Views: 0
SENTENCING OPINION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
/. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...................................959
A. Indictment, Guilty Plea, And Sentencing Hearing......................959
B. Arguments Of The Parties............................................960
1. Amicus curiaes arguments........................................960
2. Newhouses ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Presently pending before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss (doc. 50) filed by Defendants Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation and GasSearch Drilling Corporation seeking dismissal of the Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (doc. 1) in its entirety. The Motion has been fully briefed and is thus ripe for our review. For the reasons articulated herein, we will grant in part and deny in p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Before this Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (Doc. No. 33), Defendant Philadelphia Parking Authority’s Response and objections thereto (Doc. No. 36), Plaintiffs’ Reply in further support thereof (Doc. No. 37), and Defendant’s Sur-Reply (Doc. No. 38). For the reasons set forth in this Memorandum, the Court will deny the Plaintiffs’ Motion without prejudice....
Views: 0
HERNDON, Chief Judge:
I. INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is defendants’ collective motion to dismiss relator’s second amended complaint (Doc. 43). Relator has filed her response in opposition (Doc. 52). For the following reasons, defendants’ motion is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part (Doc. 43).
II. BACKGROUND
For a detailed discussion of the background of this dispute and the parties’ resp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants U.S. Bank N.A., CitiMortgage, Inc., Citigroup, Inc., JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A., RBS Securities, Inc., Everbank, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., MERSCORP, Inc., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., removed this action from the First Judicial Circuit Court, Union County, Illinois on May 25, 2012, citing this Court’s jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairnes...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
:
OLIVER J. HIGGINS, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : Civil A...
Views: 1
Page 12389
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is presently pending before the court on defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 5.)1 Plaintiff, Steven S. Harris, Jr., has sued defendant, Brandon K. Falls, the District Attorney for Jefferson County, alleging that defendant violated his constitutional rights to due process and to be free from unreasonable seizure; his claims are based on a number of criminal complain...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs, Pfizer Inc., Wyeth LLC, and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc. (collectively, “Pfizer”), market an anti-transplant rejection medication based on rapamycin, also known as sirolimus, under the trade name Rapamune®. The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) Orange Book lists U.S. Patent No. 5,100,899 (filed June 6, 1989) in connection with Pfizer’s Rapamune® product.1
On or a...
Views: 1
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 33], Plaintiff opposes the Motion. A hearing on the Motion was held on October 4, 2012, at which arguments were heard. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is granted. Introduction Plaintiff brought this action in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri, for injuri...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action filed pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Plaintiff Douglas Willard, a former employee of the Ohio Operating Engineers, asserts claims against the Ohio Operating Engineers Pension Plan (“the Pension Plan”) and its Board of Trustees, and against the Ohio Operating Engineers Health and Welfare Plan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The court has before it several motions to dismiss by the defendants. Defendants United Agricultural Cooperative, Inc., f/k/a/ Farmers Cooperative of El Campo, and Eagle Lake General Store (incorrectly sued as “Eagle Creek General Store”) (collectively referred to herein as “defendants” or “United Ag”), filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendants SnoWizard, Inc. (“SnoWizard”) and Ronald R. Sciortino (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment on Duplicative Claims1 in Civil Action No. 11-1499, which was consolidated with Civil Actions Nos. 06-9170, 09-3394, and 10-0791 by another section of this Court before the matter was transferred here. Therein, Defendants move the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is a suit to recover damages for the allegedly wrongful death of John W. Lucia while in the custody of the Peabody Police Department. Plaintiff Katelyn Lucia, is the decedent’s daughter and the administrator of his estate. Defendants include the City of Peabody and its mayor, as well as the Peabody Police Department, its chief...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
1. Introduction
Plaintiff Jennifer Broderick (“Broderick”) brings this suit against Defendant PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (“PNC”) arising out of Broderick’s home mortgage loan. Broderick alleges that National City Mortgage (“NCM”) engaged in unfair and deceptive trade practices when it originated her home mortgage loan, and that PNC is liable as NCM’s successor in interest. PN...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER AND OPINION ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Official-Capacity Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 42] and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on State Law Tort Claims [DE 43]. The motions are on behalf of Defendant Palm Beach County School Board (“the School Board”).1 The Court has carefully considered the motions, responses, repl...
Views: 0
*639OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Carlotta Motsinger’s (“Motsinger”) Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim of Defendant Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (“Nationwide”) [Dkt. No. 59] seeking a declaratory judgment regarding Mot-singer’s status as a Class I insured under her Nationwide insurance policies based on her allegation of a common law marital relationship. In s...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
Criminal No. 11-238-1(CKK)
GILBERTO LERMA-PLATA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(January 30, 2013)
Gilberto...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Levert Lyons (“Lyons”) sued defendant Nike, Inc. (“Nike”) for infringement of United States Patent No. 5,513,-448 (“the '448 Patent”), issued to Lyons by the United States Patent & Trademark Office in 1996. Nike responded with counterclaims seeking declaratory judgments that the '448 Patent was invalid and that Nike had not infringed the '448 Patent. In ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
On July 17, 2012, after a two-day jury trial on plaintiff Yurek Syrnik’s claims for unlawful discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“section 1981”), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”), and the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”), the jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff in an amount of $105,981.27 ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
In American football the saying goes that the best offense is a good defense. This case asks whether the reverse is true. Even if the best defense were a good offense, however, the Court here decides that an insurer’s duty to pay for an insured’s litigation defense does not extend to paying for the insured’s proactive lawsuits or other pre-litigation activities.
Plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Moo & Oink, Inc. (“Moo & Oink”) brings this suit against various individual and entity defendants alleging a myriad of federal and state law claims. (R. 93, Second Am. Compl.) Generally, Moo & Oink alleges that between January 2011 and May 2011, Chicago Boxed Beef, Inc. (“Chicago Boxed Beef’), Dutch Farms, Inc. (“Dutch Farms”), and Windy City Food Distributors, Inc....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On March 12, 2012, plaintiff Miguel W. Roca-Barnett (“plaintiff Roca”) filed a complaint alleging five causes of action pursuant to Puerto Rico law1 against defendants Caribbean International News Corp. (“CIN”), Elliot Stein (“Stein”), and Martin Pompadour (“Pompadour”). (Docket No. 1.) Defendant CIN subsequently submitted a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, purs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Spencer Spiker (“Spiker” or “plaintiff’) filed a second amended com*587plaint in this case on May 17, 2011 alleging violations of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”) based upon violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and various tort claims under Pennsylvania law. (ECF No. 108.) ...
Views: 0
Page 12660
ORDER
Before the Court is a Motion to Transfer for Improper Venue (“Defendants’ Motion”), filed by Robert Murray (“Murray”), Lamson, Dugan & Murray, L.L.P. (“LDM”), and Ryan Boe (“Boe”) (collectively “Defendants”) on October 4, 2012. Clerk’s No. 25. On October 18, 2012, Richard Steen and Lloydene Steen (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed a resistance. Clerk’s No. 28. Defendants replied to Plaintiff...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the Motions of Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, National Association [Dkt. 2] and Professional Foreclosure Corporation of Virginia [Dkt. 6] (collectively, the “Defendants”) to Dismiss the Complaint (collectively, the “Motions”) of Plaintiffs Eric Fedewa and Ritika Fedewa (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”). For the following reasons, Defendan...
Views: 0
Page 12674
ORDER
This is an appeal from an Order entered on March 5, 2012 by the United States Bankruptcy Court in this district (Stong, J.) authorizing the retention of Troutman Sanders, LLP (“Troutman”) as general and bankruptcy counsel for John S. Pereira, the Chapter 7 Trustee for the Estate of Debtor Christine Persaud (hereinafter the “Estate”). Appellant Abraham Klein (“Klein”), who purports to be o...
Views: 0
Page 12675
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Jennifer and Robert Intravaia bring this action individually and on behalf of their disabled infant daughter, Skylar Intravaia (“Skylar”), against the Rocky Point Union Free School District (“School District”), Superintendent Michael F. Ring (“Ring”), and David Pearl, Esq. (“Pearl”) (“collectively, the “defendants”), seeking to redress violations of their rights un...
Views: 0
Page 12677
UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALBERT V. PEYUS JR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 11-02087 (RJL)
)
RAY LAHOOD, Secretary, United States )
Department of Transportation, ) F I L E D
> N29 ms
Defendant. ) JA 2
Glerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
{'*f*‘ Gourts mr the District of Co|umbia
MEMORANDUM OPINION
January B_, 2013 [Dkt. #4]
Plaintiff Albert V. Peyus...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STEPHANIE Y. BROWN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 12-799 (RJL)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al., )
, F1LEn
D€f€lldallf$. ) 2 g
r}'-""' C|erk, U.S. Dist_rict_& Bankruptcy
bollrts forma D|Sil'lCt 01 CUiUmbia
(January 35 , 2013) [#9]
Plaintiff Stephanie Yvonne BroWn ("plaintiff" or "Brown") brings this action
against the Unive...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On November 9, 2012, a jury found that Defendants Watsontown Trucking Co., Inc., and William Miller were not negligent when their truck that Defendant Miller was driving collided with Plaintiff Michael Lewis Scott, who was riding on a motorcycle, at the intersection of Broad Street and Parham Road in Richmond, Virginia.1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59, Plainti...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Pending before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction filed by third-party defendant, Acadian Contractors, Inc. (“Acadian”), on December 6, 2012. [rec. doc. 36]. Third-party-defendant, Merit Energy Company, LLC (“Merit”), filed opposition on December 27, 2012. [rec. doc. 44]. Acadian filed a Reply on January 9, 2013. [rec. doc. 49]...
Views: 0
Page 12718
FINAL ORDER
This matter comes before the court on plaintiffs Motion for Default Judgment against defendant The Wing Spot Chicken *661& Waffles, Inc. (ECF No. 12), filed on October 9, 2012. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge by Order of October 26, 2012, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), to conduct hearings,...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING CONSECO’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING CONSECO’S MOTION TO DE-CERTIFY THE ENTIRE CLASS OR SUBCLASS
Now before the Court are plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment, defendant Conseco’s motion for summary judgment, and Conseeo’s motion for decertification of the entire class, or i...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Micheline Hammouda,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-0130 (JDB)
United States Department of Justice
Office of Information Policy,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OP...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
OBAYDULLAH,
Petitioner,
Civil Case No. 08-01173 (RJL)
FILED
JAN 30 2013
C|erk, U.S. Dist_rict_& Bankruptcy
MEM()RAN])UM ()R])ER Courts for the Destnct ot Cu|umbla
(Januaryz:@zoiz) [# 1381
V.
BARACK H. OBAMA, et al.,
S§&é/S\\J\\¢I§J
Resp0ndents.
On February 8, 2012, petitioner Obaydulluh filed a motion for relief from this
C...
Views: 0
Page 12970
ORDER
This is a breach of contract case in which plaintiff/counter-defendant, Heidtman Steel Products, Inc. (Heidtman), claims defendant/counter-plaintiff, Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc. (Faurecia), failed to pay money due under the parties’ contract. Faurecia counterclaimed, alleging Heidtman also breached the contract and that it is entitled to an appropriate setoff.
Pending is Heidtman’s mo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
RALLS CORPORATION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil ...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant United Foods & Commercial Workers Union, Local 152’s (“Local 152”) motion for summary judgment [Docket Item 23] and Defendant Center Square Supermarket, LLC’s (“Center Square” or “ShopRite”) motion for summary judgment [Docket Item 28]. Plaintiff Thomas Treusch (“Plaintiff’ or “Mr. Treusch”) has filed opposition to both motion...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
The plaintiff, Kevin M. McCann, M.D., brings this action against, among others, the defendant Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, sued here as “Unum Provident” (“Provident”). (See generally dkt. entry no. 1, Compl., Count I.) McCann alleges that he purchased a supplemental long-term disability (“LTD”) insurance policy (“the Policy”) from Provident in ...
Views: 0
ORDER He who knows not and knows not he knows not: he is a fool — shun him. He who knows not and knows he knows not: he is simple — teaeh him. *945He who knows and knows not he knows: he is asleep — wake him. He who knoivs and knows he knows: he is wise — folloio him. German Proverb * * :}? * * * Once again, the Court is charged with the unenviable task of deciding yet another in an exceptionally ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This three-count complaint is a putative class action brought by Sean Regan against Sioux Honey Association Cooperative (“Sioux Honey”), the manufacturer of Sue Bee Clover Honey. In Count II, Regan alleges that the failure to disclose the absence of bee pollen in Sue Bee Clover Honey violates the labeling requirements associated with Wisconsin’s so-called “Honey Standard.” This...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Hanover Insurance Company’s (“Hanover”) Motion for Summary Judgment requesting reconsideration of Judge Zainey’s partial denial of prior earlier motions for summary judgment regarding insurance issues in Civil Actions Nos. 06-9170, 09-3394, and 10-0791.1 Judge Zainey partially granted Hanover’s earlier motions for summary judgment upon finding that SnoWizar...
Views: 0
Page 13202
MEMORANDUM ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
There are numerous pending motions in this patent infringement case in which Plaintiff Protective Industries Inc., d.b.a. Caplugs, (“Plaintiff’ or “Caplugs”) claims that Defendants Ratermann Manufacturing, Inc. (“RMI”), George Ratermann (“Ratermann”), Progressive Plastics, Inc. (“Progressive”) and Henry Buermann (“Buermann”) (collectively “Defendants”) have infr...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on the following:
Dkt. 1 Complaint
Dkt. 19 Motion to Dismiss (Counts VIH, IX) (CPH Engineers, Inc., Stephen N. Romano, P.E.)
Dkt. 20 Motion to Dismiss (Counts VI, VII) (T.Y. Lin International)
Dkt. 28 Motion to Dismiss (Counts II, TV, V) (Lee County)
Dkt. 30 Opposition
Dkt. 31 Opposition
Dkt. 37 Reply (T.Y. Lin International)
Dkt. 43 Reply (CPH Engineers,...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: INDEFINITENESS
In this patent case, a jury found that Samsung had infringed several of Apple’s patents, including Claim 50 of U.S. Patent No. 7,864,168 (“the '163 Patent”) and four design patents: No. D618,677 (“the D'677 Patent”); No. D593,087 (“the D'087 Patent”); No. D604,305 (“the D'305 Patent”); and No. D504,889 (“the D'889 Patent”). Samsung now argues that Claim 50 of the '163 Pat...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
On August 24, 2012, after a thirteen day trial and approximately three full days of deliberation, a jury in this patent case reached a verdict. See ECF No. 1931. Apple now seeks judgment as a matter of law to overturn certain of the jury’s findings, and judgment as a matter of law as to other issues that the jury di...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
On August 24, 2012, after a thirteen day trial and approximately three full days of deliberation, a jury in this patent case reached a verdict. See ECF No. 1931. Samsung now seeks judgment as a matter of law to overturn certain of the jury’s findings. In the alternative, Samsung moves for a new trial. See Samsung’s ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and to Determine Attorneys’ Lien [Doc. No. 78]; the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Mike Opat and Mark Stenglein [Doc. No. 84]; and the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants the Municipal Building Commission (“MBC”), R.T. Rybak, and Lisa Goodman [Doc. No. 89]. For the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant ConAgra Foods, Ine.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 14.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendant’s motion.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of Defendant’s representations that its Hebrew National products are “100% Kosher.” (Doc. No. 8, Am. Com...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross motions for Summary Judgment. (ECF #84, 86). Both parties have submitted responses and replies to the motions for Summary Judgment. (ECF # 88, 92, 94, 97). The Court has carefully considered all of the pleadings, motions, briefing, and relevant law, and finds that Defendants’ Motion, for Summary Judgment (ECF # 84) should be ...
Views: 0
Page 13302
Memorandum of Opinion and Order
This is a patent infringement action pertaining to two design patents relating to *802sports jerseys for pets. Defendants Hunter MFG, LLP (Hunter) and CDI International, Inc. (CDI) have filed a joint motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 42.) Also pending before the Court is a motion by the plaintiff for oral argument. (Doc. 51.) For the reasons stated below, defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Before this Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Certification (Doc. 223) of a class conditionally certified under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and affiliated Defendants’ Motion to Decertify the Conditionally Certified Class (Doc. 215). The Motions have been fully briefed (see Docs. 216, 224, 227 & 228). At issue is whether...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is defendants’ motion for sanctions for “discovery abuses intended to harass defendants, cause unnecessary delay, and needlessly increase the cost of litigation” under both Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (ECF Nos. 54 and 56). Briefing is complete. No further hearing is necessary.1 Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons set forth below, the Court G...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint. For the reasons stated herein, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff George Lagen (hereinafter, “Lagen” or “Plaintiff’), on behalf of himself and others similarly situated filed a Complaint against Defendants United Continental Holdings, Inc. a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Eboni Coleman (“Coleman”) has brought this two-count action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) against Supervalu, Inc. (“Supervalu”) and the Supervalu Inc. Short Term Disability Program (the “Program”). As a participant in the Program, Coleman claims in Count I that she has been denied benefits due under its terms and in Count II that Superv...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CORNELL HERBERT,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-01719 (CKK)
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Janua...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DELARSE MONTGOMERY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-cv-1223 (RLW)
JOSHUA GOTBAUM, Director,
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,
Defendant.
MEMORAN...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JAMES M. BROWN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-cv-1108 (RLW)
DAVITA VANCE-COOKS, Acting Public
Printer of the U.S. Government Printing
Office,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PHILLIP W. FOX, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0374 (ABJ...
Views: 0
Page 13504
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff was a teacher for defendant school district from 1980 to 2010. For two years, 1995 and 1996, plaintiff worked halftime as a teacher for defendant. Plaintiff decided to retire in 2010 and attempted to take advantage of an early retirement incentive program which provided $35,000.00 to eligible teachers. According to defendant’s contract with its teachers, to qualif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Bill’s Birds Inc. (“Bill’s Birds”) and William Pelinsky (“Pelinsky”) (collectively the “Plaintiffs”), bring this action against Defendants seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, and claiming unfair trade practices and antitrust violations under federal and New York state law, in connection with automotive decorative trim pieces Plaintiffs sell or i...
Views: 11
*114OPINION AND ORDER
Before this Court are the Motion for Summary Judgment of Plaintiff Continental Casualty Company (“Continental”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, (Doc. 27); the Motion to Dismiss of Defendant Marshall Granger & Co., LLP (“Marshall Granger”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), (Doc. 34); and the Motion to Dismiss of DefendantsIntervenors Joseph...
Views: 1
Opinion after Bench Trial
Plaintiff Merck & Cie (“Merck”), formerly known as Merck Eprova AG, a producer of pharmaceutical and dietary ingredients, brings this action against Defendant Acella Pharmaceuticals LLC (“Acella”), formerly known as Brookstone Pharmaceuticals LLC, a corporation that develops, markets, and sells low-cost vitamins and nutritional supplements; Merck also names two of Acella...
Views: 0
Page 13707
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT This matter is presently before the Court on plaintiffs motion for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) [docket entry 24], Defendant has filed a response. Pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(f)(2), the Court shall decide this motion without oral argument. Accordingly, the heari...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action arises from disputes between pro se plaintiff Denis F. Sheils, a Pennsylvania citizen and licensed attorney,1 and his ex-wife over their marital settlement agreement and ongoing disagreements about matters such as alimony adjustments and child support. Those controversies have been, and continue, in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas and its Domestic Relations Section...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 18), filed November 16, 2012. After careful consideration of the motion, response, reply, briefs, appendices, record, and applicable law, the court grants in part and denies in part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted as to Plaintiffs Title VII a...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , )
)
v. ) Crimin...
Views: 0
JUDGMENT
This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Patrick Manna for Report and Recommendation. After an independent review of the record, including the Objections and Reply to Objections, this Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct and adopts the findings and conclusions therein as its own. As such, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. The de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Tanya Anusie-Howard sued William Todd, Michael Baker, Michael Eppig, Anthony Lee, and the Baltimore County Board of Education (collectively the “defendants”) for violations of the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”).1 Pending are Anusie-Howard’s motion to strike and the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. No hearing is required. See Local Rule 105.6. For t...
Views: 0
Page 13825
ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion for contempt as to the Municipality of San Juan and the urbanization of Los Arboles de Montehiedra Community Association (“Los Arboles”) for not allowing Plaintiffs’ to engage in door-to-door ministry. (See Docket No. 885.) Los Arboles opposed the motion (Docket No. 894), arguing that their actions are not in contradiction to the court’s orders. The ...
Views: 0
*245OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Docket # 91), the plaintiffs opposition thereto (Docket # 102), and the defendant’s reply (Docket # 109). After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the defendant’s motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
Factual and Procedural Background
In this diversity suit, Lara González sues Hurley Interna...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOSEPH LEE,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action 09-cv-1832 (RC)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHEWAFERAW SHIBESHI,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-356 (JEB)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se Plaintiff Shewaferaw ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
THE CUNEO LAW GROUP, P.C., et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0246...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SABINA LOVING, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-385 (JEB)
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On January 18, 2013, this Court i...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Signicast, LLC, filed a complaint against Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company in Wisconsin state court. The complaint does not allege a federal claim. Fireman’s removed the case to this court, alleging in its notice of removal that the parties are diverse and that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. However, the notice of removal alleges that Signicast “is a Delaware limi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT NO. 105]
Pending before the Court is the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (dkt. *515no. 105) as to the individual plaintiffs’ claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress (“outrage”) against the individual defendants. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS the defendants’ motion and DISMIS...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JANE DOE I, by her conservator,
Linda Tarlow, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action 01-2398 (RC)
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
Page 13953
ORDER
The relationship between Defendants Ann Platz and Rachel Thomas Hale and Plaintiffs Brian F. Durkin and Craig W. Richards started off amicably enough. Desiring to adapt their unpublished manuscript “The Snow White Ladies of the Third Week” into a movie, Defendants de*1321cided to join forces with Plaintiffs, who have experience in the movie business and had recently formed a production co...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are defendant Minnesota Life Insurance Company’s (Minnesota Life) Emergency Motion for Protective Order Re: Deposition Subpoena Issued to Dr. Antonuc-cio and Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Designation of Dr. Antonuccio as Testifying Expert. (Docs. # 123, # 124.)1 Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, joined in Minnesota Life’s motions. (Docs. # 126, # 127.) Plaintiff Linda Downs o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
After nearly 17 months of litigation in state court, and on the eve of trial there, defendant ITT Corporation (“ITT”) removed this state law contract, trade secret, fraud, and conspiracy dispute to this district court on the basis of federal question jurisdiction. Plaintiff FastMetrix, Inc. (“FastMetrix”) now seeks remand, arguing that removal is improper because (i) the comp...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RICHARD FISHER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-2107 (RJL)
)
ISAAC FULWOOD, JR., ,,
§ rstEo
Def°nda"t' ) il i 2@5§3
RANDUM QPINION c,-znn~. 1‘ .: 'r).i‘vl'»'i iv 3@""~‘"?"‘:¥'
r~ C¢_;i_@rl'»., m ina D‘,'_tnr;i ot COlUmb‘-a
/$,2013[1)1774 F.
Supp. 2d 54, 55 (D.D.C. 2011) (Fz`sher 1) (granting in part and denying in part
defend...
Views: 0
*1012ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS, OR ALTERNATIVELY FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
On April 10, 2012, Plaintiffs Jorge H. Medrano and Ronnie Medrano filed suit in this Court against Defendants Kern County Sheriffs Officer, County of Kern, and Does 1 to 10, alleging causes of action for (1) violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; (2) violation o...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to all claims in the Complaint. Plaintiffs filed an opposition on May 7, 2012. (Dkt. No. 44.) On May 14, 2012, Defendants filed a reply. (Dkt. No. 45.) On May 17, 2012, the matter was taken under submission. (Dkt. No. 46.) On October 4, 2012, the case w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants Verizon Communications, Inc., Verizon Online LLC, and Verizon Online-Maryland LLC’s (collectively, ‘Verizon’s”) Motion to Compel Arbitration, or in the alternative, Motion to Dismiss. (Dkt. No. 11.) This case concerns the validity of a communications services provider’s contract provision assessing an early termination f...
Views: 0
Page 14166
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION; FURTHER BRIEFING Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, sought a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a 2009 decision by the California Board of Parole Hearings’ (“Board”) decision which determined that Petitioner was unsuitable for parole. Respondent was ordered to show cause why the writ sho...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, ALTERNATIVELY, PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND TO STRIKE
Plaintiff Beth A. Rhodes brought this action against Sutter Health, Sutter Gould Medical Foundation (“SGMF”), and The Gould Medical Group, Inc. (“GMG”) alleging unlawful retaliation, constructive discharge, gender harassment, gender discrimination, failure to prevent discrimination, v...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff John Cook, a political reporter for Gawker Media, requested documents from the National Archives and Records Administration (“NARA” or “the government”) pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) relating to research requests made on behalf of former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney, NARA denied Mr. Cook’s request in part, citi...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Janira Torres (“Torres”), Victor Feliciano (“Feliciano”), and Maria S. Fonseca (“Fonseca”) commenced this action, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, asserting that defendant United Healthcare Services, Inc. (“defendant”) deprived its sales representative employees, including plaintiffs, of earned overtime compensation in violation of the Fai...
Views: 2
ORDER This is an action for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident. Defendants Teeberry Logistics, LLC and James Parham removed this case to this Court from the State Court of Troup County, Georgia. The matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Cheryl Cameron’s motion to remand [7]. I. Background On August 24, 2011, Cameron was injured in a vehicular collision with a tractor-trailer...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Julio C. Meléndez (“Meléndez”) and Sylvia Elizabeth Meléndez (“Mrs. Meléndez”) sued Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide, Inc. (“Starwood”) and Sheraton Puerto Rico Management, LLC, (“Sheraton”), alleging age discrimination and unjust dismissal pursuant to federal and Puerto Rico law. (Docket No. 1). Defendants answered the complaint (Docket No. 14) and filed a motion to dism...
Views: 0
Page 14266
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
In this six-count complaint arising out of Defendants’ legal representation of Plaintiff in a lawsuit he filed against his former employer, Defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 Plaintiff has moved to amend his complaint. The motions to dismiss, ECF Nos. 6 & 11, are denied. Th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Kathy Sak and Zbigniew Bulkowski (“Plaintiffs”) have sued CitiMortgage, Inc., Safeguard Properties, LLC, and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”) in this diversity case for trespassing onto Plaintiffs’ property, a house in Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Defendant CitiMortgage has moved for summary judgment. For the reasons stated herein, th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiffs argue that the State of Illinois has established unconstitutionally onerous requirements on independent and “new” party candidates for getting their names on the ballot for the April 9, 2013, special election for the Second Congressional District seat recently vacated by Jesse Jackson, Jr. They seek a preliminary injunction placing Green Party candida...
Views: 0
ORDER
Introduction
Third party Todd & Shannon, LLP (petitioner), an Oregon law firm, moves to reopen the ancillary forfeiture proceeding and for relief from the judgment in this matter. [# 29], Petitioner argues that pursuant to its contingent agreement with defendant, it is entitled to one third of the property forfeited in the instant matter. [# 30-p.2, Ex.A].
Background
On August 25, 2011,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On September 20, 2012, Defendants Urban Outfitters, Inc.; UO.com, L.L.C.; Urban Outfitters Wholesale, Inc.; Anthropologie, Inc.; Anthropologie.com, L.L.C.; Free People of PA, L.L.C.; and Freepeople.com, L.L.C. (collectively “Defendants”) filed a Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (Doc. 38). The parties submitted briefs in support of and in oppo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
PEXCOR MANUFACTURING )
COMPANY, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case arises out of injuries sustained by a surgical technician while removing a shield from the blade of a scalpel manufactured and sold by the defendant. The plaintiff claims that the scalpel, specifically the scalpel shield, was defectively designed. She brings her suit under both strict products liability and negligence causes of action. The defendant has moved for summary ju...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, Phyllis Oliver, has brought suit against Defendants, Clinical Practices of the University of Pennsylvania (“CPUP”), Presbyterian Medical Center of the University of Pennsylvania Health System and Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, alleging discrimination on the basis of race, disability and age.1
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. For the r...
Views: 0
ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is Defendant Standard Insurance Company’s *1030Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 17).
I. BACKGROUND1
This case was filed pursuant to the Employees Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). Plaintiff, Terry Carlson was an employee of Cargill and had the job title “Plant Operation Manager.” Carlson was a participant in an employee welfare benef...
Views: 0
OMNIBUS ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD; DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO STRIKE; GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on parties’ cross motions for summary judgment [DE 42, 46] filed on October 31, 2012 and November 1, 2012. Also before the Court is Plaintif...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion
1. Introduction
Before the Court are three motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants on August 10, 2012. (Docs. 124, 127, & 130.) The first seeks summary judgment on claims asserted by Plaintiffs Brannon and Spencer Sirmon. (Doc. 124.) Plaintiffs do not oppose this motion (Doc. 160 at 1 n. 1), and therefore, it is due to be GRANTED. The second motion seeks summary judgme...
Views: 0
Page 14429
OPINION
Plaintiffs, various health centers in New York State, who receive or are eligible to receive federal funds to provide medical care to medically underserved areas, sought injunctive and declaratory relief against the New York State Department of Health, Richard F. Daines, M.D., Com*133missioner of the Department of Health,1 and State of New York (collectively, “Defendants”), the state ag...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In order to allocate financial responsibility pursuant to the terms and conditions of various insurance policies, plaintiff, Siltronic Corporation (“Siltronic”), brings this action for declaratory judgment and breach of contract against the following defendants: Employers Insurance Company of Wausau (“Wausau”), Granite State Insurance Company (“Granite State”), Ce...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DAVID BLOEM,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-2155 (JEB)
UNKNOWN DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR EMPLOYEES,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Beginning on October 1, 2011, num...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants challenge this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 13321 on the ground that joinder of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System *160(“PSERS”) and the State Board of Administration of Florida (“FSBA”) destroys diversity jurisdiction because PSERS and FSBA are arms of their respective States, and not...
Views: 0
Page 14464
DECISION AND ORDER
Lothian Cassidy, LLC and Israel Gross-man (“Grossman,” and collectively, “Plain*159tiffs”) filed an Amended Verified Complaint (the “Amended Verified Complaint”) in New York State Supreme Court, New York County (the “State Court”), Index No. 600586/2009, against Lothian Exploration & Development II, L.P. (“LEAD II”), Lothian Energy PLC, Michael Raleigh, Paul B. Loyd, Jr., Bel...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Vernon T. Jones, pro se, alleges that his former employer, Defendant United Airlines (“United”), violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 when it discontinued his health, dental, and vision coverage and failed to promote him. United moved for summary judgment on each of Jones’s claims. For the following reasons,...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING COUNTER-DEFENDANT FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION’S AND INTERVENOR FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS [6]
This foreclosure-related litigation comes before the Court on a motion for judgment *642on the pleadings brought by Counter-Defendant Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) and Intervenor Federal Housing Fina...
Views: 0
Page 14568
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff/appellant Oneita Steele’s Notice of Appeal (doc. 1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). Steele seeks review of the Bankruptcy Court’s determination that her claim for payment of certain benefits from defendant/appellee Dwayne Laroy Heard’s pension plan is a debt dischargeable upon completion of Heard’s Chapter 13 plan. The appealed-from ruling was...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE JURY TRIAL DEMAND
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendants’ Joint Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Jury Trial Demand [DE 10]. The Court has considered the motion, Plaintiffs’ Response [DE 13], Defendants’ Reply [DE 14], the record in this case, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
I. BACKGROUND
On July 5, 2012,...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ROYAL CARIBBEAN’S SUMMARY-JUDGMENT MOTION
This case arises out of a collision between two jet skis during a jet-ski tour *1174provided by Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (Royal). Royal instituted this action for exoneration from or limitation of liability under 46 U.S.C. § 30505. In response, Claimant Linda Arnold filed a claim and a complaint for damages...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
F()R THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vi Criminal No. 09-236-02 (RCL)
SEAN V. ALLEN,
Defendant. F I E D
`-I\\_/\\_/\\_/\\¢JS\\SS§/
FEB / i 2013
MEMoRANDUM oPINIoN "'iiea@ir'»§.i£r§dr§ii$18 U.S.C. § 3582(0)(2). Also before the Court is correspondence
from Mr. Allen construed to be an exhibit to the underlying Motion. The Clerk of the Court is
here...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. # 14), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, it ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for review in this Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) case are cross motions for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 12 & 15). The issues have been fully briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing being deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6. For the following reasons, the motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Jonathan K. Yu will be denied (...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This litigation is a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), *282as well as a certified wage and hour class action under the laws of 14 states. Currently before the Court are three motions: (1) plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, (2) defendants’ motion for summary judgment and/or decertification of the class and collective actions, and (...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [DE 72] filed on October 5, 2012. Plaintiff filed a response [DE 81] on October 31, 2012. Defendants replied [DE 84] on November 12, 2012. A hearing was held on the matter on November 30, 2012, and a ruling was made to grant Defendants’ motion in open court. For th...
Views: 1
Memorandum & Order
Before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ fourth and fifth claims for relief. For the reasons set forth below, this Court now denies the motion to dismiss.
FACTS
Plaintiffs Pearson Education, Cengage Learning, Inc., and Bedford, Freeman, & Worth Publishing Group (“Plaintiffs”) bring a lawsuit- against Boundless Learning Inc. (“Defendant”) for five causes o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case arises out of an alleged violation of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibits disability discrimination against federal employees. Plaintiff Tracey Bartlett (“plaintiff’) alleges that she was forced to leave her position as a clerk in the And-over, Massachusetts office of defendant Department of the Treasury (“IRS”) because she was subject to a hostile work environme...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION OR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
This action involves Defendant Samuel Merritt University’s alleged failure to provide a disabled student with additional opportunities to take a medical licensing exam. Now pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction or Temporary Restraining Order (“...
Views: 0
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
On October 22, 2012, plaintiff LP Digital Solutions d/b/a Divistop filed suit against defendant Signifi Solutions, Inc, a Canadian Corporation, erroneously named as Signifi Solutions, Inc., a Delaware Corporation. Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiff alleges that defendant breached its contractual obligations by, inter alia, failing to provide plaintiff...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a motion1 to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue or, in the alternative, to transfer venue filed by defendants, NBCUniversal Media, LLC and Syfy Media Productions, LLC. Plaintiff, Preston Asevedo, opposes the motion and requests attorney’s fees for the cost of defending against the motion to dismiss.2 Asevedo requests, in the altern...
Views: 0
Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Plaintiffs Drakes Bay Oyster Company (the “Company”) and Kevin Lunny (“Lunny” and collectively, “Plaintiffs”) initiated this action requesting that the Court declare void and unlawful the November 29, 2012 Memorandum of Decision of Defendant Kenneth L. Salazar, Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior (“Secretary”), in which he d...
Views: 0
ORDER
The plaintiffs move for attorney’s fees for their successful litigation against the Forest Service. Their motion is granted in part.
Background
This case arises out of a dispute involving the Beaver Creek Project — a proposed timber sale and prescribed burning on the Custer National Forest. The plaintiffs challenged several aspects of the Project. They claimed that the Project violated the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER REVERSING ADMINISTRATOR’S DENIAL OF LONG TERM RETIREMENT BENEFITS
I. INTRODUCTION
In this suit, Plaintiff Cynthia Magdziak challenges the decision of the Defendant claims administrator, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, to deny her long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits under a plan sponsored by her employer, Northwest Airlines. This Court’s subject matter jurisdiction rests...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Jane Doe, a former student in the Stoughton Public Schools, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Defendants1 Brett Dickens, the principal, and Anthony Sarno, the Superintendent of Schools, failed to prevent other students from sexually harassing her in school. Defendants have moved to dismiss counts 4 and 5, which allege t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is Defendants Animal Care Trust’s, Karen Walsh’s, Marvin Nicholson, Jr.’s, and Paula Hum’s (“Defendants”) motion for judgment on the pleadings (Court File No. 37).1 Plaintiff United Pet Supply, Inc. (“Plaintiff’) responded to the motion (Court Files No. 40), and Defendants replied (Court Files No. 46). For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on two motions for summary judgment. The Plaintiff, Teamsters Local Union No. 89 (“the Union”), filed a motion for summary judgment against the Defendant, The Kroger Co. (“Kroger”), in which the Union seeks to compel Kroger to arbitrate its former employee’s grievance pursuant to Kroger’s collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) with the Union (...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT While on their way to purchase crack cocaine, Plaintiffs Reginald Brown and Nicholas Biles were robbed and falsely imprisoned by Defendant Arthur Sease IV, who at the time was an off-duty Memphis police officer. Plaintiffs allege civil rights violations and tort law claims against Defendants Sease and the City of Memphis. The City ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On March 12, 2012, the Plaintiff Janet D’lorio (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action by filing a Complaint against the Defendant Winebow, Inc. (“the Defendant”). The action seeks statutory, injunctive and equitable relief relating to the Defendant’s alleged breach of fiduciary duty for its failure to disclose plan documents and its affirmative and/or negligent m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff in this case, James Donnell Lawson (“the Plaintiff’), alleged that Suffolk County Police Officers Arturo Salazar (“Salazar”), Officer Raphael Fragola (“Fragola”) and John Graziano (“Graziano,” and collectively, “the Officers”) used excessive force against him. Based on this allegation, the Plaintiff brought this action against the Officers and the Co...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS ON MOTION
John Akins and 179 other named plaintiffs, individually on and on behalf of all those similarly situated,1 filed this putative collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). Plaintiffs allege that their former employers, Worley Catastrophe Response, LLC, Worley Catastrophe Services, LLC (collectively ‘Worley”) and Michael Allen Wor...
Views: 0
*700MEMORANDUM AND OPINION ENTERING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This is a dispute over responsibility for damage to a large power transformer. The plaintiff, Crompton Greaves, Ltd. designs and manufactures power transformers in India. Tucson Electric Power (TEP), an electric utility, contracted with Crompton Greaves, through its subsidiary Pauwels Americas, to build and ship to the Un...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Before the Court is the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings in this mortgage foreclosure case. The plaintiffs ceased making mortgage payments in July 2009, and foreclosure was initiated in early 2010. The foreclosure sale apparently has not yet occurred. The plaintiffs brought su...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER This case involves a contractual dispute between the two members of a Wisconsin LLC, plaintiff Halaska International, Inc. (“Halaska”) and defendant Carhart, Inc. Halaska brought the action in state court and joined the LLC, Carharb-Halaska International, LLC (“CH”), as a plaintiff and Chris Carhart, the owner of Carhart, Inc. and a manager of the LLC, as a defendant. Defendan...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jerome Norris brought this lawsuit against his former employer, defendant GKN Westland Aerospace, Inc., for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990(ADA), as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.) and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) (29 U.S.C. § 2611 et seq.). Jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question), 42 U.S.C. § 1...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an employment discrimination case. On January 1, 2012, Felicia R. Dug-gins (“Duggins”) filed suit against the Appoquinimink School District (“District”) alleging violations of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 § 501 et seq., 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12111 et seq. (“ADA”), the Family Medical Leave A...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Before the court is Defendant’s Motion to Declare the Defendant Currently Incompetent to Stand Trial. (Doc. # 65). After thoroughly considering the exhibits and testimony admitted into evidence during the hearing on Defendant’s motion conducted from July 25, 2011 through August 3, 2011, the court file, and each party’s written submissions, the court makes...
Views: 0
Page 15419
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This collection of lawsuits arises out of the marketing and sales of two related anti-depressant drugs by defendant Forest Pharmaceuticals (“Forest”), Celexa and Lexapro. The crux of the allegations is that from about 2001 to 2005, Forest illegally promoted the drugs for off-label use in pediatric and adolescent patients. The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) had, however, a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This case involves a series of disputes with respect to loan obligations and associated mortgages encumbering 22 acres of commercial land in Saugus, Massachusetts. The plaintiff-lender foreclosed upon a mortgage it held on the property and bought the property at auction.
Plaintiff now sues the defendant-borrower for breach of contract, specific performance, injunctive relie...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending before the Court are two motions for summary judgment: (1) the City Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [filed August 81, 2012; docket # 126 ] filed by Defendants Richard Meyers, Jimmy Rodgers, Jackson Andrews, and the City of Colorado Springs (collectively, the “City Defendants”); and (2) the County Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuan...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants White Plains School District (“WPSD”), Agnieszka Blazkiewicz (“Blazkiewicz”), Ted O’Donnell (“O’Donnell”), and John Does 1-10 (the “WPSD Does”) (the “Individual Defendants”) bring this Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint in its entirety pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Doc. 8. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED in full.
I. Backgroun...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case concerns allegations of deception and bad faith against a health insurance company, The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”). Plaintiffs Beverly Clark, Jesse J. Paul, Warren Gold, Linda M. Cusanelli, Carole L. Walcher, and Terri L. Drogell (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) have filed a putative class action complaint against Prudential. Before the Court are two mo...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This claim was initially brought by Aida M. Delfau's. Gonzalez (“Plaintiff’) against Spirit Airlines (“Spirit” or “Defendant”) in the Puerto Rico Court of First Instance, San Juan Superior Court, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.; Puerto Rico Law 100 of June 30, 1959 (“Law 100”), P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 29, §§ 146 et seq.; and Puerto...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff The Narragansett Electric Company (“Narragansett”) brings this action for damages and declaratory relief against defendants American Home Assurance Company (“American Home”), Century Indemnity Company (“Century”), Equitas Insurance Limited (“EIL”), and Dominion Insurance Company Ltd., Excess Insurance Company Ltd., National Casualty Company, the London & Edinburgh...
Views: 1
DECISION & ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff filed a diversity complaint in this Court on May 20, 2011, alleging breach of contract and negligence when her bed and breakfast (“B & B”) burned down and the insurance was insufficient to cover replacement costs. This case is before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stat*432ed below, Defendants’ application is granted in...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Synovus Bank removed this matter to this Court from state court on August 10, 2012. (D.E. 1). Synovus Bank has now moved to dismiss this case due to lack of personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to transfer it to the Northern District of Georgia under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). (D.E. 4). Plaintiff Mills 2011 LLC (“Mills”) opposes these requests and, in its opposition, argues...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Plaintiffs are a certified class of field workers employed by farm labor contractors T & R Bangi’s Agricultural Services (“T & R Bangi”) and Cal-Pacific Farms (“Cal-Pacific”), who performed work for defendant Delano Farms Company (“Delano Farms”) during the period from 2005 to 2009. On January 15, 2018 through January 30, 2013, the court conducted a seven-day bench trial ...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FILED ON JANUARY 10, 2013; VACATING THE COMMISSIONER’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING; REMANDING PLAINTIFF’S CASE TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION UNDER SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) FOR PAYMENT OF CHILD’S SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME CONSISTENT WITH THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, AND THIS DECISION AND ENTRY; AND...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This is a case brought by Plaintiffs under 5 U.S.C. § 706(1) (hereinafter “ § 706(1)”) of the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”). Plaintiffs contend that Defendants have failed to act on a Title VI complaint of discrimination that was filed in 1994. However, on August 30, 2012, Defendants finally issued a letter of dismissal on Plaintiffs’ Title VI compla...
Views: 0
FINAL ORDER APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT; GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS, AND INCENTIVE AWARDS; OVERRULING PERRYMAN’S OBJECTIONS
On January 28, 2013, this Court heard plaintiffs Josué Romero, Gina Bailey, Jennifer Lawler, John Walters, Daniel Cox, Christopher Dickey, Grant Jenkins, and Bradley Berentson’s (collectively “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Final Approval of Settle...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Victoria Graudins has filed a wide-ranging complaint against Retro Fitness, LLC, Daniel Kraft, Jim Kanagie, Dan Carr, and Paul Carr that includes hostile work environment and retaliation claims under Title VII as well as a variety of state law claims. *460In response, the Defendants (with the exception of Paul Carr) filed a motion for partial summary judgment and a motion to sever. For...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal from an order entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of North Carolina (“bankruptcy court”) that retroactively annulled an order of automatic stay. For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that the bankruptcy court committed no error, and its order is affirmed. I. BACKGROUND Beginning in June 2007, Kristopher M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss In Part the Second Consolidated Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 360).1 Having reviewed the motion, Plaintiffs’ response (Doc. No. 373), Defendants’ reply brief in support of their motion (Doc. No. 377), and all papers in support thereof, the Court finds that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss In Part the Second Consolidated A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Johnathan Nathans (“Nathans”) filed this action against defendants Jose Offerman (“Offerman”) and the Long Island Ducks Professional Baseball Club, LLC (“Ducks”) alleging (1) assault and battery, (2) negligence, and (3) reckless assault and battery, all stemming from an altercation during a professional baseball game in ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant 200 Kelsey Associates, LLC’s (“200 Kelsey”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) or, in the alternative, to dismiss in part pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and to strike impertinent matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f). After examining the Complaint, 200 Kels...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This civil rights action is set for trial on February 13, 2013. Now before the court are sixteen motions in limine filed by the defense [docs. 37-52], In addition, the defense moves for a pretrial conference to address the pending motions [doc. 54]. Plaintiff has responded to the motions in limine [doc. 59], and the defense has submitted a reply [doc. 60]. Also before the cour...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is Defendant Buffalo & Associates, PLC’s (“Defendant”) partial motion to dismiss (Court File No. 8). Defendant argues it is not a “creditor” under the Truth In Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601, et seq., and is therefore not a proper defendant for TILA claims. Defendant similarly argues one of Plaintiff Diane McGhee’s (“Plaintiff’) claims under the Fair Debt Co...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court is defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, filed August 9, 2012. On September 4, 2012, plaintiff filed her response, and on September 20, 2012, defendants filed their reply. I. Background On August 25, 2010, plaintiff had a posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery at the L5-S1 spine to correct a degenerative disc condition.1 The Infuse® Bone Graft pr...
Views: 0
Page 16062
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is John Deere Thibodaux, Inc.’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
*569
Background
This dispute arises out of an alleged breach of an oral contract.
Servicios Azucareros de Venezuela, C.A., a Venezuela corporation, and its president, Z...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the Motion to Sever and Stay1 filed by defendant and third-party plaintiff, St. Mary’s Academy of the Holy Family (“St. Mary’s”),2 wherein St. Mary’s requests that third party defendant Satterfield & Pontikes Construction Group, L.L.C.’s (“S & P”) claims be severed and stayed pending resolution of claims asserted in the matter pending in the Civil District ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT In this consolidated civil rights case, Plaintiffs Ann Alicia Ortega, Kelly Boren, Kristal Carillo, and Sharelle Thomas (collectively “Plaintiffs”) bring claims against the City and County of Denver (“Denver” or “Defendant”1) and Officers Ricky Nixon and Kevin Devine arising out of an incident at the Denver Diner on July 11...
Views: 0
ORDER (1) GRANTING DEFEN-DANTSICOUNTERCLAIMANTS TODD DOMECK, EXPERIENTIAL RESOURCES, INC., AND GO ZIP, LLC’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO COUNT I (PATENT INFRINGEMENT) OF THE COMPLAINT FILED ON AUGUST 8, 2012, DOC. NO. 47; AND (2) GRANTING DEFENDANT MAUI LAND AND PINEAPPLE COMPANY, INC.’S AND KAPALUA LAND COMPANY, LTD.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO COUNT I OF THE COMPLAINT, DOC. NO. 56...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion (#7) to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Venue or, Alternatively, Motion to Transfer Venue and Defendant’s Motion (# 10) to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted.
For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.
BACKGROUND
The follow...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Contents
I.Background .....524
A. The Iraqi sanctions.................................................524
B. The Oil-for-Food Programme in Design...............................525
1. The UN escrow account..........................................526
2. Oil sales .......................................................526
3. Goods purchases............................................
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Currently before the Court is a motion of defendant Raymond C. Green, Inc. (“RCG”) to withdraw the reference to the bankruptcy Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157.
I. Background
Inofin Inc. (“Inofin”) was in the business of financing sub-prime auto loans. RCG is a creditor that financed Inofin’s business. In late 2010 Inofin experienced financial difficulties and by January, 201...
Views: 0
Page 16220
DECISION AND ORDER This is a pro se civil rights action by a former inmate who, at the time that the complaint was filed, was in the custody of the New York State Department of Correctional Services. Plaintiff John Nevarez, who has since been released from custody and is apparently living in an apartment in the Bronx, alleges that defendants prevented him from using the Groveland Correctional Fa...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTIONS IN LI-MINE, AND OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
[Dkt. No. 198]
Presently before the court is Defendant Skechers U.S.A. (“Skechers”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Having considered the submissions of the parties and heard oral argument, the court grants the motion in part, denies the motion in part, and adopts the following amended order.1...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING THE SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFIT COMMITTEE OF THE NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION RETIREE SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFIT PROGRAM’S MOTION TO INTERVENE (DOC. #394) UNDER RULE 24 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE; SAID INTERVENOR IS ORDERED TO FILE A PLEADING, IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 24(c), IN ORDER TO BRING ITS MOTION INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULE’S PROCEDURAL RE...
Views: 0
*172MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This case involves the attempted foreclosure of a mortgage by defendant Certifícate holders of Bear Stearns Asset-Backed Securities I LLC, Asset Backed Certificates, Series 2007 HE6 (“the Trust”) on a property in Lynn, Massachusetts. That property belongs to plaintiff Richard F. Courtney (“plaintiff’ or “Courtney”).
I. Background
In March, 2007, plaintiff purchased a home a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff William Almeder (“Almeder”) brings this action for employment discrimination on the basis of religion against defendant Town of Bourne (“the Town”), which previously employed plaintiff as a *164truck driver in the Town’s Department of Integrated Waste Management (“DIWM”). Defendant now moves for summary judgment on plaintiffs claims and to strike plaintiffs affidavit ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 17); CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 23); AND STAYING CASE.
I. INTRODUCTION
This case arises under the citizen suit provision of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a). Plaintiffs, a coalition of environmental and labor interests, allege that Defendant VWR International, LLC, (“VWR”), a laboratory supply distributor, violated San Joaquin Valley Air...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, William R. Johnson, brings this action against Defendant, Chase Bankcard Services, alleging disability discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA”) and Ohio’s anti-discrimination statute, Ohio Revised Code, § 4112.01 et seq. Additionally, Plaintiff brings a claim of wrongful adverse action in violation of Ohio...
Views: 0
ORDER
Emergency Motion to Compel (# 30) and Motion to Bifurcate (# 33))
Before the court is plaintiff Osbourne Ren-frew’s Emergency Motion to Compel. (# 30). Defendants filed an Opposition (#32), and plaintiff filed a Reply (# 40).
Also before the court is defendants’ Motion to Bifurcate, or In the Alternative Stay Discovery of the Extra-Contractual Cause of Action. (#33). Plaintiff filed an Oppo...
Views: 0
*329
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Debtor-Appellant, D. Erik von Kiel, appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Court’s order dated January 5, 2012. For the following reasons, and having considered fully the briefs and the record on appeal, and having determined that oral argument is not necessary in this case,1 the Court will affirm the order of the Bankruptcy Court.
I.Background
On May 6, 2010, Debtor filed a...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHARIF MOBLEY, et al.
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action Nos. 11-2072, 11-2073 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. How...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the court on the Defendants Houston County Health Care Authority and Dawn Michelle Ralls’s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Paul M. Deutsch (Doc. # 110), Dothan OBYN, Inc. and Guy Malcolm Middleton’s Motion to Strike and Preclude Testimony by Dr. Paul Deutsch (Doc. # 113), a Motion to Strike Exhibit G from Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’s Daubert Motion to Exclude t...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Afremov became extremely wealthy when he won a lawsuit against his former business partners. Afremov committed perjury in the course pf that litigation, filed false tax returns to bolster his perjured testimony, and, long after the litigation concluded, pleaded guilty to federal tax charges. Afremov brings this action against the attorneys (Michel LaFond, John Harrington, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
-------------------------------------------------------
:
MICHAEL BOARDLEY, : CASE NO. 1:07-CV-01986
:
Plaintiff, :
...
Views: 0
Page 16545
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TREA SENIOR CITIZENS LEAGUE,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 10-1423 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
VANESSA T. HAYES, as the Personal
Representative of the Estate of Gerard El
Hayes,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 11-00800 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
...
Views: 0
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND OVERRULING IN PART MCCARTHY’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES (Doc. #74); AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES TO McCarthy in the amount of $15,313.11 AND TERMINATING THIS CASE
Now before the Court is Plaintiff Kathleen A. McCarthy’s (“McCarthy’s”) Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses. (Doc. # 74.) This Motion is now fully briefed and ripe for deci...
Views: 0
Page 16603
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.INTRODUCTION........................................................734
A. Procedural Background..............................................734
B. Factual Background.................................................735
1. Summary of medical evidence.....................................735
2. Hearing testimony......
Views: 0
Page 16669
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
ARIANA KLAY, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Ac...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER
Plaintiff Assured Guaranty Municipal Corporation (“Assured”)1 alleges that defendants Flagstar Bank, FSB; Flagstar Capital Markets Corporation; and Flags-tar ABS, LLC (collectively, “Flagstar”) breached a series of contracts that provided financial guaranty insurance against certain defaults affecting two Flagstar securitizations backed by home equi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter is before the court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint or for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rules 12(b) and 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’ claims for injunctive relief are moot and that Defendants have qualified immuni...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION This antitrust litigation arises following a series of patent lawsuits between Apotex, Inc. and Apotex Corp. (collectively, “Apotex”) and Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Senju Pharma”), Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Kyorin”), and Allergan, Inc. (“Allergan”) (collectively, “Senju”) regarding aqueous liquid pharmaceutical compositions for treating bacterial co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff Christina Chennault’s Objections (ECF No. 11) to the Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge Novak (ECF No. 9). Chennault filed suit, as guardian and personal representative for Lajune S. Brunson, against Michelle B. Mitchell, former Sheriff of the City of Richmond; Gary L. Sink, a former Captain in the Sheriffs Dep...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DAN ABRAHAM SARFATI,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-1221 (JEB)
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, a foreign
state, the MINISTRY OF FINANCE, a
political subdivision of Antigua and
Barbuda, and the MINISTRY OF
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
MARK R. GEIER, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Americorp Financial, L.L.C. commenced this action in state court in September of 2011, seeking to recover under a pair of financing agreements through which (i) Plaintiff agreed to provide financing for the purchase by Defendant Lansing Pharmacy, L.C. of two pharmaceutical dispensing systems, and (ii) t...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO RULE 11 AND 28 U.S.C. § 1927 ON PLAINTIFFS’ ATTORNEY, EMMETT GREENWOOD
The above-captioned cases are two of nine mortgage foreclosure cases assigned to this Court during the past year that were filed on behalf of the respective plaintiffs by Michigan attorney, Emmett Greenwood. Mr. Greenwood appears to have made' a living off distressed clients f...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. (Doc. 12). The parties have filed briefs in support of their respective positions, (Docs. 13, 17, 18, 22), and the motion is ripe for resolution. After careful consideration, the Court concludes that the motion is due to be denied.
BACKGROUND
According to the complaint, (Doc. 1), the defendant is a debt...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 118.) The matter is fully briefed and ready for disposition.
I. BACKGROUND
In this action, Plaintiffs Compass Bank and Vectra Bank Colorado, N.A. (“Plaintiffs”) seek remedies in connection with the alleged breach of a contract and fraudulent inducement of that ...
Views: 0
OPINION
SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge.
Plaintiff VICI Racing, LLC (“VICI” or “plaintiff’), a Florida corporation with its principal place of business in Miami, Florida, filed this suit against defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile” or “defendant”), a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Bellevue, Washington, on September 30, 2010. (D.I. 1) Plaintiff claims damages tota...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17127: ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Lisle-Woodridge Fire Protection District
Page 17127
*840 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER More than 2-1/2 years after this action was instituted and almost exactly a year after it has survived (albeit with some limitations) at the appellate level (672 F.3d 492 (7th Cir.2012), cited for convenience as simply “ADT, 672 F.3d at _”), codefendant Chicago Metropolitan Fire Prevention Company (“Chicago Metro”) has come forward with a motion to dismiss Count...
Views: 0
Page 17151
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss, filed May 23, 2012 (Doc. 17). The Court held a hearing on November 9, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court should extend a cause of action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619...
Views: 0
Page 17153
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the CCA, Hickson and Vallejos’ Motion to Dismiss, filed Sept. 24, 2012 (Doc. 10)(“Motion to Dismiss”). The Court held a hearing on November 27, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Defendant Dale Greffet, a corrections officer at the New Mexico Women’s Correctional Facility (“NMWCF”) in Grants, New Mexico, was acting un...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in the Central District of California Krauth action seeks centralization of the actions listed on Schedule A in the Central District of California. The plaintiffs motion encompasses twelve actions pending in five districts.1 This litigation concerns the marketing, sale and advertising of the mileage estimates of Hyundai and K...
Views: 0
Page 17182
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, pro se litigants David Kissi and his wife, Edith Truvillion (the Kissis), move to centralize this litigation in the Central District of California. This litigation currently consists of three actions, as listed on Schedule A, pending in the District of District of Columbia and the District of Maryland. Bank of America, N.A. an...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in five actions move for centralization of this litigation in the District of Maine. This litigation currently consists of five actions pending in five districts, as listed on . Schedule A. Defendants TRS Recovery Services, Inc., and TeleCheck Services, Inc., support centralization in the District of Maine. On the basis of, ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Holly J. Eisberner filed a complaint against three of her creditors — Discover Products, Inc., World Financial Bank, Inc., and GE Capital Retail Bank — under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). When the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, Eisberner filed an amended complaint. Before me now are the defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RE: PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND
I. Introduction
This diversity case raises an issue that has divided courts in this District. Plaintiffs have moved to remand this action to state court on the basis of the “forum defendant rule,” 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2). The forum defendant rule provides that an action cannot be removed on the basis of diversity jurisdiction “if any of the parties in ...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Tracey Lipton claims in this putative class action that Chattem, Inc. sold her a weight loss product, Dexatrim Max (“Dexatrim”), that was contaminated with a toxic substance, hexavalent chromium. The complaint alleges only economic injury, not physical injury, and sets forth state law claims under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act (“ICFA”), 815...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KEMERIA AHMED BESHIR
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-652 (JDB)
ERIC H. HOLDER JR., et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is an immigra...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
EKRAM SIDDIQUE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-2043 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Pro se plaintiff Miguel Duran brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He asserts various constitutional torts related to his pre-trial detention at the Atlantic County Justice Facility. Currently before the Court are three summary judgment motions brought by defendant CFG Health Systems LLC (“CFG”) [Dkt. Ent. 266]; individual defendants Warden Gary Merline, Captain J...
Views: 0
ORDER
On March 4, 2008, after departing the Wiley Post Airport (‘Wiley Post” or “PWA”) in Bethany, Oklahoma, a Cessna Citation jet aircraft bearing FAA registration number N113SH crashed after a collision with one or more American White Pelicans near the southeast end of Lake Overholser in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The aircraft struck the subject bird(s) approximately 4 miles from Wiley Post at ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 85) and Statement of Undisputed Material Facts (Doc. 86), Defendants’ Response (Doc. 101) and Statement of Facts (Doc. 100), and the Reply (Doc. 102). For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion will be granted.
I. Procedural Background
Plaintiffs brought this action to enjoin enforcement of Arizona Legislature HB 2800, 2nd...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On August 8,- 2012, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint, alleging nine sepa*1128rate counts against Defendants with regards to the enactment and enforcement of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“ACA”). Plaintiffs assert that because they are Catholic, religious entities and employers, the requirements of the ACA to provide contraceptive, ster...
Views: 0
AMENDED DECISION AND ORDER By Decision and Order dated October 1, 2012, 900 F.Supp.2d 355, 2012 WL 4887738, issued following a bench trial of this action, the Court found defendants Entech Engineering, P.C. (“Entech”) and Soudabey Bayat (“Bayat,” and together with Entech, “Defendants”) liable on plaintiff Ahmed Zubar’s (“Zubair”) claims for unpaid overtime wages. The Court directed the parties t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action involves federal, state, and common law claims and counterclaims by and between Jean Claude Delville (“Plaintiff” or “Delville”) and his former employer, Firmenich Incorporated (“Defendant,” “the Company,” or “Firmenich”). Delville claims that Firmenich (1) discriminated against him on the basis of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER The day before an in-person discovery conference was scheduled to occur in this case, the defendants’ counsel, Will Shuman, Esq., submitted a letter to the Court which sought an adjournment of the conference and permission to appear telephonically. In that letter, Mr. Shuman provided the following reason for this request: “On the morning of Friday January 4, 2013, I...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Woori Bank (‘Woori”) filed the complaint in this action on May 18, 2012 asserting common law claims for fraud, rescission, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment (the “Complaint”) arising out of its $143 million investment in seven collateralized debt-obligations (“CDOs”). By letter dated September 20, 2012, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., Merrill Lynch Inter...
Views: 0
*1375ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant Trans Union LLC moves for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of ’Illinois. This litigation currently consists of three actions pending in two districts^ as listed on Schedule A. Plaintiffs in the three actions oppose centralization, but in the alternative, suggest selection of the Norther...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, five women, have brought this action on behalf of themselves and a putative class of current and former female professional employees of Defendant KPMG LLP, the U.S. member firm of global accounting firm KPMG International, alleging various forms of employment discrimination. Defendant has moved to dismiss, strike, or transfer most of Plaintiffs’ claims, including ...
Views: 0
*1371TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in the District of New Jersey Clark action moves to centralize this litigation in the District of New Jersey. This litigation currently consists of four actions pending in the Northern District of California and an action in the District of New Jersey, as listed on Schedule A.1 The actions involve claims by direct and in...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER By a Superseding Indictment, the Government charged defendant Diogenes De Jesus Sierra (“Sierra”) with: (a) one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute one kilogram or more of mixtures and substances containing a detectable amount of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 812, 841(a)(1), and 841(b)(1)(A); and (b) one count of intentionally and...
Views: 2
ORDER The Court has very carefully reviewed the tendered agreement submitted by the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Docket No. 2-1). The same is extremely comprehensive, insofar as it proposes reform initiatives to modernize and professionalize the Puerto Rico police force, as well as monitoring compliance with the parties’ terms. The agreement, the consideration of which the Co...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Martin A. Biegler, Cara M. Biegler, and Christine K. Schirber, IRA, by and through its Trustee, BankWest, Inc., (collectively “Bieglers”) sued Defendants Richard Kraft and Caryn R. Kraft (“Krafts”) seeking specific performance of what the Bieglers allege to be a contract for the purchase of 314 acres in Dewey County, South Dakota....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On December 22, 2011, the Plaintiff Levitón Manufacturing Co., Inc. commenced this action against the Defendants George J. Reeve, Jr., Charlotte H. Reeve, The Law Firm of Arthur M. Garel, and Arthur M. Garel (collectively, “the Defendants”), asserting claims for breach of contract, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, Presently before the Court are three motion...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(h)(6)”) filed by defendants Deloitte LLP, Deloitte Tax LLP, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Services LP, Francisco A. Castillo Penne, Ricardo Villate Prieto, and Michelle Corretjer Catalan. (Docket No. 17.) Having considered the complaint, (Docket No. 1), as well as the ar...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DONALD WILLIS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-01314 (CKK)
CHASE HOME FINANCE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(February 8, 2013)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Gander Mountain Company (“plaintiff’ or “Gander Mountain”) commenced the within action seeking monetary damages, declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against defendant Islip U-slip LLC (“defendant”). Presently before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint in its entirety pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 12(b)...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARC BOWMAN BROWN, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : Civil Action No. 11-052...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. [Docket No. 24] The Court heard oral argument on November 30, 2012.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
1. Deputy Lawler’s Visit to Cari Johnson’s House
On the morning of December 3, 2010, Mille Lacs County Sheriff Deputy Mitch Lawler responded to a domestic disturbance call at t...
Views: 0
Page 17796
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................782
A. Factual Background.................... 782
B. Procedural Background..............................................784
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS........... ..........................................785
A. Standards For Summary Judgm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, PEMEX Exploración y Producción (“PEP”), has brought suit against multiple defendants for claims arising from sales in the United States of natural gas condensate allegedly stolen from PEP in Mexico. On June 8, 2012, the court held a scheduling conference and issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order (Docket Entry No. 106) granting three motions to dismiss to ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GEO SPECIALTY CHEMICALS, INC.
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 12-01819 (RJL)
V.
GREGORY HUSISIAN, et al.,
%&/€§€\\¢/\\J§/@
FILED
Defendants.
7‘;,,,. FEB l 1 2013
MEM()RANDUM GPINIGN l C|erk, U.S. District‘& Bankruptcy
(February g § 2()]3) [#4] Courts forthe D\\stnct of Co|umb:a
Plaintiff GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc. ("plaintiff'...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT
I. Introduction
This lawsuit arises out of a dispute over coal royalties paid by Plaintiff Signal Peak Energy, LLC (“SPE”), to Defendants Eastern Montana Minerals and Mussel-shell Resources (collectively, “EMM”), under a July 16, 2008 Coal Lease. SPE filed this action seeking a declaratory judgment that it is properly payin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are the plaintiffs First and Second Motions in Limine, the defendant’s Motion in Limine, and the defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judg*791ment, or in the Alternative, for a Remand. For the reasons that follow and as stated in open court, the plaintiffs two Motions in Limine will be denied, the defendant’s Motion in Limine will be granted, and the defend...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the motion of Defendant American International Group, Inc., d/b/a American International Companies (“AIG”) [Doc. No. 27] to dismiss this action against it for lack of personal jurisdiction. Plaintiff timely opposed the motion, and AIG filed a reply.
In this action, Plaintiff asserts claims based on an automobile insurance policy issued by Defendant Granite State Insura...
Views: 0
*619ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING DIXON’S OBJECTIONS (Doc. # 20) TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. # 19) IN ITS ENTIRETY; DISMISSING DIXON’S PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS WITH PREJUDICE; DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS; DENYING ANY REQUESTED CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY BECAUSE ANY APPEAL WOULD BE O...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The matters before me are (1) Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Memorandum Brief in *1177Support Thereof [# 50],1 filed November 16, 2012; and (2) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [# 49], filed November 16, 2012.2 I grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment in part and deny it as moot in part, deny plaintiffs’ summa...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Based on an advertisement representing the mileage of a 1970 Chevrolet Chevelle to be 56,537 miles, Plaintiff Stephen Beam purchased the advertised vehicle from Defendant Domani Motor Cars, Inc. Shortly after procuring the car, however, Beam realized that the odometer was stuck at 56,537 miles and attempted to return the Chevelle. Defendant refused to acce...
Views: 0
ORDER
Petitioner Grand Canyon Skywalk Development, LLC (“GCSD”) has filed an application for confirmation of an arbitration award. Doc. 1. Respondent ‘Sa’ Nyu Wa, Inc. (“SNW”) has filed a response and a motion to vacate the arbitration award and dismiss this matter. Doc. 7. The petition and motion are fully briefed. Docs. 12, 13, 14. The Court heard oral argument from both parties on January 24, ...
Views: 0
FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FEB - 5 2013
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Cou...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JEFFREY M. ALLOVIO, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Case No. 11-01851 (RJL)
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.,
United States Attorney General,
FILED
Defendant. FEB 1 1 2013
Sé\\/\\JS%/€é€@\\/
CV` Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
MEMORAND M PINION Courtsforthe Districtof()o|umbia
(February , 2()13) [# ll]
Plaintiffs are 34 current or retired age...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WILLIAM HAWKINS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 09-1831 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
After he criticized a new crime...
Views: 0
*608
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (“BMS”), markets a medication under the trade name Baraclude® for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection in adults with evidence of active viral replication, and either evidence of persistent elevations in serum aminotransferases or histologically active disease. (D.I. 135, ex 1 (hereinafter “Unconteste...
Views: 0
Page 18227
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment, ECF No. 52. The Court has reviewed the motion, the memoranda in support and opposition, the statements of fact, the affidavits and declarations of the parties, all other relevant filings, and is fully informed. BACKGROUND The following facts are not in dispute. Plaintif...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Amusement Industry, Inc. and Practical Finance Co., Inc. (collectively, “Amusement”) have sued defendants Moses Stern, First Republic Group Realty, LLC (“FRG LLC”), First Republic Group Corp. (“FRG Corp.”), Ephraim Frenkel, Land Title Associates Agency, LLC (“LTA”), Joshua Safrin, and Avery Egert, seeking damages arising out of the loss of $13 million given to Stern...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the Motion to Compel Deposition Testimony and Exclude Evidence [DE 423] filed by the defendant, the Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund (PCF), on May 21, 2012; the Motion to Compel Production of Withheld Documents and Exclude Evidence [DE 427] filed by PCF on May 21, 2012; the Motion to Strike Docket Entries 423 and 425 [DE 462] filed by the ...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
Thai Lao Lignite (Thailand) Co., Ltd., a company organized under the laws of Thailand, and Hongsa Lignite (LAO PDR) Co., Ltd., a company organized under the laws of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (collectively, “Petitioners”), moved for confirmation of an arbitral award (the *511“Award”) pursuant to the United Nations Convention on the Recognition of Foreign Arbitral Awa...
Views: 0
*1058 ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Thomas C. Mummert, filed January 23, 2013 (ECF No. 25). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court referred this matter to Magistrate Judge Mummert. Magistrate Judge Mummert recommends that the Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice. Plainti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation(the “FDIC”) as receiver for Mutual Bank (the “Bank”) sued the Defendants for gross negligence under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), together with various state law claims including negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and the wasting of corporate assets. The claims arise fro...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants Robert Bosch LLC, Robert Bosch Tool Corporation (collectively, “Bosch”), Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc., and Lowe’s Companies, Inc. (collectively, “Lowe’s”) seek leave to file an amended Answer that. asserts affirmative defenses under New Jersey law to the plaintiffs tort claims. See Docket Entry (“DE”) 39 (original motion); DE 42 (supplemental motion papers); Fed.R.Civ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Joseph Cichon (“Cichon”) has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus (“Petition”) under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)).2 Cichon challenges his 105 year sentence stemming from convictions in Illinois state court on four counts of aggravated criminal sexual assault, two counts of criminal sexual assault, one count ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves various claims made by Plaintiffs, Long John Silver’s, Inc. and A & W Restaurants, Inc. (“A & W”) against Patrick Nickleson1 and three of his business entities2 (collectively “Defendants”) in connection with a series of failed restaurant franchises in Minnesota. Defendants have filed three counterclaims against A & W particular to the A & W franchis...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REVOCATION OF ORDER RELEASING DEFENDANT I. INTRODUCTION Defendant Ricardo Figueroa Tapia (“Figueroa Tapia”) was arrested on December 17, 2012, based on a Complaint charging one count of Passport Fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1542. Doc. 1. On January 3, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge William D. Gerdes conducted a detention hearing under the Bail Reform...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Bonestine Johnson sued her employer, the General Services Administration (“GSA”), alleging discrimination based on her race, sex, and age. She also alleged retaliation for her complaints of discrimination and related activity. (Docket Entry No. 1). Johnson’s specific discrimination claims were that GSA failed to consider her for a promotion she applied for, failed to give her...
Views: 0
Page 18518
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PABLO FIGUEROA, et al.,
Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 07-CV-1992 (BJR)
v. MEMORANDUM AND OPINION ON
ISSUES RAISED IN SUPPLEMENTAL
DISTRI...
Views: 0
Page 18522
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant Press Ganey Associates, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay the Case [6]. Having considered the motion, the response and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion is not well taken and should be denied.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff South Central Regional Medical Center (“South Central”) is ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BEATRICE GIRDLER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 10-1807 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-361 (RMC...
Views: 1
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On January 22, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Steven P. Shreder entered his Report and Recommendation in regard to Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 11]; Plaintiffs Motion to Dissolve or Modify Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. No. 4]; the Motion to Extend Temporary Restra...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs, all of whom are African-American or Latino residents of New York, allege that the New York Police Department (“NYPD”) has a widespread practice of making unlawful trespass stops outside buildings in the Bronx that are enrolled in the Trespass Affidavit Program (“TAP”), which was formerly known as “Operation Clean Halls.”1 This program allows “police...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendant UT Medical Group, Inc.’s (“UTMG”) Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. # 134) filed June 26, 2012. The Court referred this Motion to United States Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton for issuance of a report and recommendation in an order dated August 2, 20...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Velma and Landon Townsend (“Plaintiffs”) commenced this action by filing a complaint in the Fluvanna County Circuit Court against the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and Samuel I. White, P.C. (“SIWPC”). Fannie Mae and SIWPC timely removed and filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs then filed an Amended Complaint, in which they'added Wells Fargo ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending is the defendant’s partial “Motion to Dismiss” (doc. no. 24 in Case No. l:ll-cv-874, Rosario Esparza, Sr. v. Pierre Foods) regarding four claims in the amended complaint. Also pending is the identical “Motion to Dismiss” filed in the companion case (doc. no. 25 in Case No. l:ll-ev-875, Consuelo Esparza v. Pierre Foods).1 The cases have been consolidated for purposes of discovery a...
Views: 0
Page 18653
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. 47) The Court has reviewed the January 15, 2013 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (doc. 47), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2) has expired, hereby ADOPTS...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________
)
ELIZABETH RODRIGUEZ, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Case No. 12-CV-434 (EGS)
v. )
)
SH...
Views: 1
DECISION & ORDER
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Plaintiff Patricia A. Fox (“Fox”) initiated the pending civil rights action against defendants the County of Yates (“the County”), Sheriff Ronald G. Spike (“Spike”), Undersheriff John C. Gleason (“Gleason”) and Lieutenant Clay Rugar (“Rugar”) (collectively, “defendants”), asserting various constitutional and state law claims arising out of her employment...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 7], filed on September 28, 2012. The Court has carefully considered the motion, Plaintiffs Response in Opposition [DE 9], Defendant’s Reply [DE 15], and arguments made at an oral hearing on November 19, 2012. The Court converted the motion into a motion for summary judgment. [DE 19]. The parties...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION AND MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
INTRODUCTION
In this employment-discrimination action, defendants move under Rule 12(b)(1) to dismiss plaintiffs claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and under Rule 12(c) for judgment on the pleadings. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ mot...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress evidence obtained by law enforcement during a warrantless search of his vehicle on September 13, 2012 (“Motion”). For the reasons set forth herein, the Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.
I. Factual and Procedural History
On September 13, 2012, at 8:09 P.M., City of Hampton Police Detective Keith Tuc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Motions to Dismiss)
This case involves a dispute over the rights to the service mark for “Strawberry Hill Races,” a century-old steeplechase horse racing tradition in Richmond, Virginia. In early 2012, Defendants were spearheading arrangements to hold the event at Colonial Downs racetrack later that summer. Shortly before the race was held, Plaintiffs purchased the federally...
Views: 0
Page 18917
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Cross motions for summary judgment on the issue of insurance coverage are pending before the Court. [Record Documents 131 and 149]. This case arises out of an incident in which Plaintiff Bob Morris was struck by Jon Coker, an employee of Allis Chalmers. Defendant Illinois National Insurance Company (“Illinois National”) issued an excess commercial general liability policy to Al...
Views: 0
Page 18920
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, William Wells, Priscilla Wells, Jalisa Gibson, Shanay Gibson, J.W., and J.D.W. (collectively “Plaintiffs”), bring this action against Defendants, including Defendant Brandon Rhodes (“Rhodes”), alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1982, 42 U.S.C. § 1985, 42 U.S.C. § 3617 of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), and Ohio Revised Code § 2307.70. This matter is before the Court ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JEWELL RYAN-WHITE,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-177 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
REBECCA BLANK,
Acting United States Secretary o...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER, TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY, AND CLOSING FILE
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Gerber Products Company and Nestlé USA, Inc.’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Transfer, ECF No. 33. Defendants Gerber Products Company (“Gerber”) and Nestlé USA (“Nestlé”) ask the Court to transfer this case, purs...
Views: 0
*467ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING-IN-PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES [DOC. 69].
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs motion to strike Defendant’s affirmative defenses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f). (Pl.’s Mot. [Doe. 69].) Defendants oppose. (Defs. ’ Opp’n [Doe. 10].) The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See CIV...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss in a case dealing with fallout from the recent mortgage crisis. (Mot. (Dkt. # 31).) This case requires us to consider how certain real estate finance laws apply in the context of mortgage-backed securities and other complex debt instruments. The court has considered the...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANTHONY HARRIS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1453 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER
AND SEWER AUTHORITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Anthony Harris...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEREK A. JONES,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1454 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER
AND SEWER AUTHORITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Derek A. Jones, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Faisal Hassan Abdi is a native of Somalia. He moved to the United States in 2005 and, after waiting the required five-year period, filed an application for naturalization as a United States citizen. The application was denied, as was his request for administrative review. Abdi then commenced this action against Defendants United States Citizensh...
Views: 0
*1169MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In December 2011, Plaintiff A.W., then 15 years old, called a phone-sex chat line operated by Defendant Preferred Platinum Plan, Inc. (“Preferred Platinum”) and incurred a $103 bill, which A.W.’s father, Nick Williams, refused to pay. Alleging that Preferred Platinum and certain of its agents harassed A.W. to obtain payment, Williams commenced this a...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In this criminal case, the defendant, charged with firearms offenses, has moved to suppress certain evidence seized by local police pursuant to a search warrant on the ground that the items seized exceeded the scope of the warrant. In addition, she has moved to dismiss the charges on the ground that they violate her rights under the Second Amendment. Following an evidentiary hear...
Views: 0
Page 19154
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On January 10, 2010, Glenn Verser, an inmate at Stateville Correctional Center (“Stateville”), filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit pro se against various Stateville staff, including its medical director, alleging inter alia that he was denied adequate medical *1030care as guaranteed under the Eighth Amendment. Subsequently, Plaintiff retained counsel and amended his compla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM I.Introduction Plaintiff Tyrone Hill, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, brings a claim for negligence against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”).1 Hill alleges that he was assaulted by another inmate while in custody and that the correctional officer on duty failed to respond to the “help” button and his calls for help. The United States moves for dismi...
Views: 0
*322
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The defendant, Lucia Maria Bolieiro1 (“Ms. Bolieiro”), is charged with violating 8 U.S.C. section 1326(a) and (b)(2), which makes the illegal reentry of a removed alien a criminal offense. The indictment charges Bolieiro with being found in the United States after having been excluded, deported, and removed without the express consent of the Attorney Gene...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 16, 2011, plaintiff Cradle IP, LLC (“Cradle IP”) filed this patent infringement action against defendant Texas Instruments, Inc. (“TI”). In its complaint, Cradle IP alleges that certain TI Multicore Digital Signal Processes, Microprocessors, and OMAP devices (“the accused products”) infringe three of Cradle IP’s patents: U.S. Patent No. 6,874,049; U....
Views: 0
Page 19270
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
WILDEARTH GUARDIANS )
and SIERRA CLUB )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL,
INC.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1156 (JEB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et
al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
KEVIN HOLLAND, Criminal Action 13-33 (RC)
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On January 31, 2013, a grand jur...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
DAVID STRUMSKY )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
BATSHEVA SHOHAM )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration (DE # 5), filed December 26, 2012. Therein, Defendant argues that Plaintiffs claims should be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the arbitration clause of an employment agreement. The Court, being briefed on the matter,1 finds that Defendant’s Motion should be grante...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 29; First Report), entered by the Honorable Thomas E. Morris, United States Magistrate Judge, on September 28, 2012, 2012 WL 7070212, and the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 35; Second Report), entered by the magistrate judge on November 26, 2012, 2012 WL 7070240. In the First Report, the magistrate judge recomm...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is before the Court on Petitioner Montea Jackson’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. I),1 the Government’s Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6), Petitioner’s Motion Requesting Leave to File Reply Motion (Doc. 7),2 and Petitioner’s Motion Requesting Leave to Amend (Doc. 9). Pursuant to Rule 8(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedi...
Views: 0
ORDER
In February 2007, a Socata TBM 700B aircraft (“the TBM 700”) piloted by Michael Milot crashed during a missed approach at New Bedford Regional Airport in Massachusetts, killing Mr. Milot and the two passengers on the plane.1 The crash allegedly occurred due to a loss of control consistent with a “torque roll” — a roll to the left upon an increase in engine power such as would occur during a...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________
)
ARAYA HENOK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-335 (RWR)
)
CH...
Views: 0
ORDER RULING ON MOTIONS
Pending before this Court are, inter alia, Defendants’ Motion in Limine to Exclude the Report and Testimony of Richard Lipsey, PH.D. (Docs. 216 & 221), Defendants’ Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence of Plaintiffs Alleged Exposure to Corrosion Inhibitor A261 (Docs. 217 & 223), Defendants’ Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence that Plaintiff Should Be Medically Monitore...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs, Liberty Media Corporation and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, “Liberty”), sued defendants, Vivendi Universal, S.A. and Universal Studios, Inc. (collectively, ‘Vivendi”), alleging violations of federal securities law and breach of express warranty under New York state law. In particular, Liberty sued Vivendi for violations of Section 10(b)...
Views: 1
Page 19487
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Juliet Anilao, Harriet Avila, Mark Dela Cruz, Claudine Gamaio, Elmer Jacinto, Jennifer Lampa, Rizza Maulion, James Millena, Theresa Ramos, Ranier Sichon (the “nurse plaintiffs” or “nurses”), and Felix Q. Vinluan (“Vinluan”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) brought this action against Thomas J. Spota, III, individually and as District Attorney of Suffolk County (“District Attorney...
Views: 0
ORDER:
(1) DENYING YEO’S MOTION TO DISMISS [DOC. 33], AND
(2) DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [DOC. 32]
On January 3, 2012, Plaintiffs DISH Network L.L.C., Echostar Technologies L.L.C. (“Echostar”), and Nagrastar LLC commenced this action against Defendants Vicxon Corporation and Soo Jong Yeo. Plaintiffs allege violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Communica*1261tions Act, and...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Paul Andretta (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against his employer, United States Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) (“Defendant”), by its secretary Janet Napolitano, alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621, 2302 (“ADEA”). Plaintiff, who was sixty-one years old at the time of the events giving rise to this action, asserts Defe...
Views: 0
ORDER (1) DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON TRADE DRESS; (2) GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE DR. WUNDERLICH’S EXPERT TESTIMONY; AND (8) GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE DR. FRAZIER’S EXPERT TESTIMONY; AND (4) DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LOST PROFITS
Plaintiff Brighton Collectibles, Inc. (“Brighton”) manufactures and sells women’...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19618: In re Plavix Marketing, Sales Practices & Products Liability Litigation
Page 19618
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C- § 1407, common defendants Brisv tol-Myers Squibb Company (Bristol-Myers) and Sanofí-Aventis U.S¡ LLC, Sar nofi-Aventis U.S. Services Inc., and Sanofi-Synthelabo, Inc. (collectively, Sanofi) move for centralization of this litigation in a federal district court in either New Jersey or New York. The litigation encompasses the 21 actions listed ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Zack (“Zack” or the “Plaintiff’) has moved to remand the proposed class action, on behalf of himself and other similarity situated individuals, to the Supreme Court for the State of New York, New York County (the “State Court”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). Plaintiff originally filed a complaint in State Court on behalf of all investors, charging the NASDAQ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD (DOC. 71)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Pinnacle Armor, Inc. (“Pinnacle”) produces armor designed to protect buildings, vehicles, and the human body. Among Pinnacle’s primary customers are local law enforcement agencies that often utilize federal subsidies to purchase body armor. Availability of at least one such subsidy is condition...
Views: 2
ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Wells Fargo Bank (“Defendant”) has filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint of plaintiffs Gurvinder Ghuman and Parminder K. Ghuman (“Plaintiffs”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). As to Plaintiffs’ third cause of action for violation of California Civil Code Section 2923.5, Defendant seeks ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Docket # 28), the plaintiffs opposition thereto (Docket # 33), and the parties’ respective replies (Dockets #37 and 49). After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the defendants’ motion is GRANTED.
Factual and Procedural Background
Shayra López-Cruz (“Plaintiff’) filed this suit against her former employ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On December 19, 2011, plaintiff Rawson brought this putative class action against defendants Source Receivables Management, Inc. (“Source”), Resurgent Capital Services, LP (“Resurgent”), Alegis Group LLC (“Alegis”), and LVNV Funding (“LVNV”), asserting claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”). Now before me is plaintiff...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Stephen Seth Hosick, a former employee of Chicago State University (“CSU”), has sued the CSU Board of Trustees (“Board”), former Board chairman Dr. Leon Finney, CSU Provost Sandra West-brooks in her individual and official capacity, and Erma Brooks Williams, the liaison between the Board and the CSU administration, in her individual and official capacity. ...
Views: 1
Page 19710
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KIMBERLI MOTLEY-IVEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-cv-571 (RLW)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Kimb...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CARL A. BARNES, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD )
OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, )
LOCAL 1200, )
)
Plaintiff, ) Civil Case No. 12-484 (RJL)
...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAURA M. LAUGHLIN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1869 (JDB)
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney
General,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Laura M. Laughlin has s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Judy Gordon alleges that her employer, defendant United States Capitol Police, interfered with her rights and committed retaliation as prohibited under the *114Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq.1 Defendant has moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim of either interference or retaliation. Upon consideration of the par...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Fraternal Order of Police Penn-Jersey Lodge 30 (“FOP”) brought this action against Defendant Delaware River Port Authority (“DRPA”) to move the Court for a mandatory injunction ordering the DRPA to submit to binding interest arbitration1 over the terms and conditions of employment for the patrol officers, corporals, and sergeants whom FOP represents and whom DRPA...
Views: 0
ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Dawn Comstock seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying her application for supplemental security income (“SSI”) pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3). Com-*1145stock contends the administrative record (“AR”) does not contain substantial evidence to support the Com...
Views: 0
ORDER RE MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS
I. INTRODUCTION
In this putative class action, plaintiff alleges that defendants violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq. (“TCPA”), by sending unsolicited text messages to consumers’ cell phones. Plaintiff seeks certification of a class of “[a]ll *293individuals that received a text message from telephone number “650-283-0793” from N...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiff Alphonso Rogers alleges in this suit that Defendant Waukegan Public School District 60: (1) discriminated against him on the basis of his race (African-American) in violation of Title VII of the CM Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., when it suspended him, changed the terms of his employment, issued him a reprimand letter, and ultimately fired h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Dolores Cole has filed suit alleging that Defendant Paslode, a division of Illinois Tool Works, Inc., terminated her employment because of her age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Plaintiff also claims that Defendant retaliated against her for making complaints of age and race discrimination under t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SONYA OWENS,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 08-CV-2029 (AK)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant District of Columbia ("District"...
Views: 0
Page 19959
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This action primarily concerns a loan security instrument known as a “standby letter of credit.” In this case, a Chinese bank loaned money to the wholly-owned Chinese subsidiary of a Kentucky corporation. To secure that loan, the Kentucky corporation obtained a standby letter of credit from an American bank. As explained below, the Chinese bank event...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs - Motion for Leave to File Amended Pleading [DE 8] and Plaintiffs Motion to Remand [DE 9]. The Court has reviewed all papers submitted by the parties in connection with these motions, the entire file in the case, and is otherwise duly advised in the premises.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of a rollover car accident on June ...
Views: 1
*1100ORDER
Pending before the Court are (1) the Town of Colorado City’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 264); (2) the Cooke Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 266); (3) the City of Hildale, Hildale-Colorado City Utilities, Twin City Power, and Twin City Water Authority’s (collectively, the “Hildale Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 267); and (4) the State of Ariz...
Views: 0
Page 20099
*1195ORDER The matters before me are (1) Plaintiffs Motion for Remand [# 18],1 filed August 6, 2012; and (2) Defendants’ Renewed Motion To Dismiss or, in the Alternative, To Transfer Venue to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division [# 17], filed August 1, 2012. I grant the motion to remand and consequently deny the motion to dismiss or transfer as moot....
Views: 1
ORDER
This is a copyright dispute. Before the court is defendants Sergej Letyagin and Ideal Consult, Ltd.’s (“Ideal”) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (# 16 1). Plaintiff Liberty Media Holdings, LLC (“Liberty Media”) has responded (#28), and Letyagin and Ideal have replied (# 30). Also before the court is Liberty Media’s Motion to Strike (# 34), to which Letyagin and Ideal ha...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND
I. Introduction
This matter is currently before the court on Plaintiffs Motion to Amend his Complaint [Doc. 42], filed on November 15, 2012. On November 21, 2012, the parties filed a Stipulation and Agreed Order [Doc. 45] extending Defendant’s deadline to respond to Plaintiffs motion. On November 26, 2012, the Court granted the parties’ stipu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this action Plaintiffs, officers representing three Nassau County Police Officers and' Detectives Unions (collectively the “Unions”) challenge the imposition of a wage freeze imposed by Defendant Nassau County Interim Finance Authority (“NIFA” or the “Authority”). The wage freeze at issue impacts compensation agreements reached between the Unions and the County of Nassau ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Mary Ann Ruane (“plaintiff’ or “Ruane”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the County of Suffolk (“defendant” or the “County”) violated her procedural and substantive due process rights when it (1) provided her with an unconstitutional post-seizure hearing before non-neutral hearing officers, and (2) refused to release her vehicle to he...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
:
KEVIN D. DELBERT, II, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs FB and EB (the “Parents”), individually and on behalf of their minor son, LB, bring this action against the New York City Department of Education and its Chanceilor, Dennis Walcott (collectively, “DOE”), pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Arkansas Teacher Retirement System and State-Boston Retirement System (“Plaintiffs”) bring this putative securities class action against Netflix, Inc. (“Netflix”); Netflix Co-Founder, Chairman of the Board, and CEO Reed Hastings (“Hastings”); current Netflix CFO David Wells (“Wells”); and Barry McCarthy (“McCarthy”), Netflix’s CFO unti...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [Docket No. 24]
I. INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is Defendants United States Attorney General Eric Holder and United States Attorney for the Northern District of California Melinda Haag’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff City of Oakland’s Complaint. Dkt. No. 24. Defendants move for dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) on th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund (“Pension Fund”) and Gary J. Meyers, in his official capacity as a fiduciary on behalf of the Pension Fund (“Mr. Meyers;” together with the “Pension Fund”, “Plaintiffs”), have filed suit against the Defendant Capital Restoration & Painting Co., doing business as Capital Restoration & Painting Company an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the court are the following motions: (1) the defendant’s partial motion for summary judgment on the issue of damages, (Doc. No. 30); (2) the defendant’s motion to strike the plaintiffs response to the defendant’s concise statement of material facts in support of the partial- ’motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No. 43); (3) the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment o...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE THIRD, FOURTH, FIFTH, AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION AND REMANDING CASE
On July 17, 2012, Plaintiff Doctors Medical Center of Modesto, Inc. (the “Hospital”) filed a Complaint in the Stanislaus County Superior Court against Defendants Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. (“Kaiser”) and Does 1 through 25. The Complaint seeks reimbursement for health care ...
Views: 0
ORDER DISSOLVING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
On October 15, 2012, Defendant filed an ex parte motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction seeking to restrain Plaintiff from foreclosing Defendant’s property located at 1340 La Mirada Drive, San Marcos, California 92078. (Dkt. No. 3.) On October 18, 2012, the Court denied Defendant’s ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order...
Views: 0
Page 20372
OPINION AND ORDER The petitioner, Marcos Nunez, brings this pro se petition for habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After a jury trial, the petitioner was convicted of two counts of robbery in the first degree in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 160.15(1), two counts of robbery in the second degree in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 160.10(2)(a), and one count of burglary in the first degree ...
Views: 0
ORDER
In his First Amended Complaint, plaintiff Daniel Menan alleges that after he defaulted on his home mortgage, he reached an agreement with defendants to avoid the foreclosure of his home. Defendants promised to rescind the Notice of Default they had filed earlier if, in return, plaintiff timely made all agreed-to “forbearance” payments. Plaintiff alleges that he timely complied with his en...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendants Best Buy Co. Inc. (“Best Buy”) and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (“Toshiba”) (collectively “Defendants”) move to dismiss Plaintiffs complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rules”) 9(b) and 12(b)(6). This case is a putative consumer class action alleging violations of the Califo...
Views: 1
Page 20483
OPINION
This employment discrimination matter came before the Court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. In a previously issued Order, the Court granted the defendant’s motion. See Order (Sept. 28, 2012). This Opinion provides the reasoning behind that decision.1
*297I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff William A. Mack brought suit against his former employer, the WP Company, LLC, d/b/a the Washi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES )
UNION, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
JED LINEBERRY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Rory M. Daughtry brought this action charging failure to accommodate his disability in violation of federal and state laws and naming as defendants Army Fleet Support, LLC (his employer), L-3 Communications Corporation (Army Fleet’s parent company), ACE American Insurance Company (L-3’s workers’ compensation insurer), ESIS, Inc. (ACE’s third-party claims administrator...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Court has under consideration two motions filed by pro se Plaintiff Nicolas *1273Cox (Cox or Plaintiff) — a Motion to Compel Cited Case Law (ECF No. 22) and a Motion for Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 32). The Court also considers Defendant Sheriffs Motion for Leave to File Surreply to Plaintiffs Reply in Support of his Motion to Compel Case Law (ECF No. 39). For the r...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
BARBARA FOX, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Ac...
Views: 0
BENCH TRIAL RULING
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Cliff Crowley (“Crowley”), as the owner of the yacht “Moondance,” and *407the New Hampshire Insurance Company (collectively, “plaintiffs”) brought this admiralty and maritime action against defendants Angelo Costa1 and Charles J. Costa, trustee of the Angelo P. Costa Revocable Trust (“Costa”). Crowley sought declaratory judgment on four counts regardi...
Views: 2
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in an Eastern District of Michigan action move for centralization of this litigation in the District of Minnesota. This litigation currently consists of four actions pending in two districts, as listed on Schedule A. Since the filing of the motion, the parties have notified the Panel of over 120 related actions pending in va...
Views: 0
RULING RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 12) AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Doc. No. 6)
I. INTRODUCTION
On November 2, 2012, plaintiff Maple Avenue Repair Service, LLC (“Maple Avenue”), a licensed towing company, filed this action in Connecticut state court seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction, alleging violation of its constitutional rights to due process ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Like walruses and seals, sea lions are “pinnipeds,” or aquatic carnivorous mammals with fins for limbs. Sea lions eat salmonids, a family of anadromous fish that includes salmon and steelhead.1 In recent years, a greater number of sea lions have travelled up the Columbia River, which runs between Oregon and Washington, to the Bonneville Dam. Because Bonneville Dam obstructs the ...
Views: 0
Plaintiff Giftango, LLC brings this action against defendants Kent Rosenberg, Todd Haimerl, Blackhawk Network California, Inc., and Blackhawk Network, Inc., contending that Rosenberg and Haimerl, who worked for plaintiff until early January 2013, violated Oregon’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act and breached Confidentiality Agreements they signed with plaintiff by providing confidential information to B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
A national drug store chain mistakenly ordered a large amount of merchandise *506from a cosmetics company. When the cosmetics company later defaulted on its bank loan, its lender foreclosed and purchased all of its assets at a peaceful and appropriate sale under the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”). The lender then sold those assets to a different cosmetics company; a...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Vito J. Fenello, Jr. and Beverly H. Fenello’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Leave to Amend their Complaint [30]. Also before the Court is Bank of America, N.A. (“BAÑA”) and The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee for CWALT, Inc.’s (“BONYM”) (together, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss [28] Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint [26].
I. BACKGR...
Views: 0
*588MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Cincinnati Insurance Co. (“Cincinnati”) and Defendants Devon International, Inc., Devon IT, Inc., Devon International Group, and Devon International Industries, Inc. (collectively, “Devon”) have filed cross-motions for summary judgment in this insurance coverage dispute. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant Cincinnati’s motion and deny Devon’s motion.
I. Bac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are the following Motions:
1)Plaintiff Engenium Solutions, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff’ or “Engenium”) Motion to Strike Defendants’ Expert Andrew Wright (“Motion to Strike Wright”) (Doc. No. 147);
2) Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Expert Dave Faiola (“Motion to Strike Faiola”) (Doc. No. 148);
3) Defendants Symphonic Technologies, Inc.’s (“Symphonic”) and Steve ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is an action for an alleged unlawful termination of a call-center employee. Plaintiff Andrew Surprise alleges that his former employer, the Innovation Group, Inc. / First Notice Systems, Inc. (collectively, “First Notice”) terminated his employment for reasons that violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER (1) DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE PROPOSED EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM GARY A. DE-RIAN, P.E. AND (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff filed this products liability action after he was injured while using a tractor and front loader designed and manufactured allegedly by Defendants.1 In his Complaint, Plaintiff asserts the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
This personal injury action is before the Court on the motion of Defendants WalMart Stores East, LP (“Wal-Mart”) and Pallet Companies, Inc., d/b/a IFCO Sys*1068terns, N.A. (“IFCO”) for summary judgment on the claims of Plaintiff Benny Aragon. For the reasons set forth below, this motion will be granted.
Background
The pleadings, depositions, and affidavits on file demonst...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
DONALD FRIEDMAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
L.G. Brown, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-0277 (BAH)
)
M. Wilhelm et ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This diversity action arose from the publication of the book “The Addict: One Patient, One Doctor, One Year” (the “Book”) authored by the defendant, Dr. Michael Stein (“Dr. Stein”). The Book recounts the battle of one of Dr. Stein’s patients 1 *235with her addiction to prescription drugs. The case is brought by Gabrielle Lisnoff (“Lisnoff’), a New York resident and former pati...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter is before me on the following: (1) the plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [# 81]1 filed May 29, 2012; (2) the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [# 115] filed August 16, 2012; and (3) the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [# 146] filed November 13, 2012. The plaintiff filed five separate documents ...
Views: 1
Page 20833
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court in consideration of Defendants’ Motion to *1333Dismiss (Doc. #48), filed on January 18, 2013. Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to the motion on January 31, 2013. (Doc. # 54). For the reasons that follow, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. Background
Beginning in 1997, Plaintiff Kennan Dandar represented the Estate of Lisa McPher...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
In this employment discrimination case, Plaintiff, Shari S. Wilcoxon, seeks relief for an alleged retaliatory discharge in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a) (Title VII). Presently pending before the Court is a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant, DECO Recovery Management, LLC (DECO), ECF No. 24. The motion is fully briefed and ripe for review.1 The briefing, facts, and a...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion to Remand Defendant’s Notice of Removal to Federal Court [DE 4], and Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss or Stay Case [DE 16] (“Motion to Compel Arbitration”). The Court has considered the motions, the parties’ responses and rep...
Views: 0
Introduction
This case began when named Plaintiff Jeffrey C. Zilba parked on the street in Port Clinton, Ohio in what he believed to be a legal parking spot. Plaintiff received a parking ticket and now challenges Defendant Port Clinton’s parking ordinance, claiming it violates his due process rights under the United States and Ohio Constitutions and also claiming the ordinance violates Ohio law.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Pending before the Court and ready for resolution is the American Nurses Association’s (“ANA”) brief in support of the Court’s authority to shift discovery costs to Plaintiffs and ANA’s decision to use an electronic discovery (“e-discovery”) vendor (ECF No. 62). The Hinterberger Plaintiffs filed an Opposition (ECF No. 66) and the ANA filed a Reply (ECF No. 69). No hea...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Pending before the Court and ready for resolution is the American Nurses Association’s (“ANA”) brief in support of the Court’s authority to shift discovery costs to Plaintiffs and ANA’s decision to use an electronic discovery (“e-discovery”) vendor (ECF No. 56). The Gordon Plaintiffs filed an Opposition (ECF No. 57) and the ANA filed a Reply (ECF No. 60). No hearing i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Contractual Vesting Claims Under ERISA.................................1098
A. The Parties ........................................................1098
1. Named Plaintiffs................................................1098
a. Carolina Telephone & Telegraph Company......................1098
b. United Telephone Companies ....................................
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Defendant GlobalSantaFe Offshore Services, Inc. (“GlobalSantaFe”) contests this Court’s personal jurisdiction over it and moves to dismiss.1 Plaintiff Kenneth Anderson opposes the motion.2 Because plaintiff does not make a prima facie showing of minimum contacts justifying the Court’s jurisdiction, GlobalSantaFe’s motion is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
This case arises out of an inc...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant Genworth Life and Annuity Insurance Company’s (“Genworth”) Motion for Summary Judgment.1 After considering the motion, the memorandum in support, the opposition, the reply, and the plaintiffs opposition to Genworth’s statement of uncontested facts, the Court will grant in part and deny in part the pending motion.
I. Background
A. Factual Backgr...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Beverly Anderson is the administrator of the estate of her husband, Lloyd Anderson, who worked as a union electrician at various facilities in and around Green Bay, Wisconsin for more *999than 40 years until his retirement in 1992. Plaintiff alleges her husband became ill as a result of occupational asbestos exposure, and she brough...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now pending before this Court is plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to Counts' II and III of the First Amended Complaint and Count XII of defendant’s Counterclaim. (ECF No. 77). Defendant has submitted a cross motion for summary judgment as to Count III of the First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 81). The Court held a hearing on January 10, 2013 and invited, and the parti...
Views: 0
Page 21005
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for resolution in this employment discrimination action is what the court construes as a motion for reconsideration filed by Plaintiff Nana-Akua Takyiwaa Shalom (ECF No. 45) and a partial motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Payless Shoesource Worldwide, Inc., Richard DeMicco, and Ronald Ebelein (ECF No. 43).1 The relevant issues have been...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff DeAngela Winston (“Ms. Winston”) has brought this action, on behalf of herself and a similarly situated class of plaintiffs (collectively, “the plaintiffs”), *633against defendant Stewart Title Guaranty Company (“Stewart”). The complaint alleges that Stewart overcharged her and other consumers who refinanced their homes within ten years of obtaining valid title insurance on...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS
The Court has before it:
• Defendants Sean Turner’s and Benjamin Ball’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue [Document 4];
• Defendants Sean Turner’s and Benjamin Ball’s Supplement to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue [Document 23], and Second Supplement to Motion to Dismiss for La...
Views: 0
ORDER On 4 February 2012, the court held a hearing on petitioner’s motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. At that hearing, the court announced its intended ruling on petitioner’s motion. This order *502memorializes that announcement and sets forth in greater detail the court’s basis for its intended ruling. Prior to being indicted in this court, petitioner was convicted of a number of offe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS MOOT
Presently before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [141] on Plaintiffs Title VII claim, as well as the parties’ joint motion for extension of time to submit disputes regarding deposition designations [165]. Upon due consideration, the Court finds D...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
■ Before the Court is defendant Puerto Rico Ports Authority’s motion for summary judgment on res judicata grounds. (Docket No. 184.) Having considered the motion and plaintiffs’ response, (Docket No. 200), the Court DENIES defendant PRPA’s motion.
DISCUSSION
I. Procedural Background
On October 16, 2009, plaintiff Daniel Grajales (“Grajales”), his wife Wanda Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”)...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
TABLE OP CONTENTS
/. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1007
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY..............................................1007
III. RELEVANT FACTS....................................................1008
IV. DISCUSSION..........................................................1009
A. Can Individual Defendants be Sued Under Title VII...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before the Court are four motions: (1) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Terminate or Limit the Deposition of M.A., (Dkt. 47); (2) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. 51); (3) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, (Dkt. 53); and (4) Defendants’ Motion to Strike Count III of Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint. (Dkt. 76) The parties presented o...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
/. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1058
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY..............................................1058
III. RELEVANT FACTS....................................................1059
TV. DISCUSSION..........................................................1060
A. Can Individual Defendants be Sued Under Title VII...
Views: 0
*383
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1. Introduction and Procedural History
Plaintiff Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company LLC (“TGPC”) filed an Amended Complaint (Doc. 11) and Amended Motion for Emergency Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 12) on January 8, 2013 seeking, inter alia, a declaratory judgment that the Natural Gas Act preempted Pennsylvania’s Environmental Hearing Board (“EHB”) from reviewing permits that ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Crow Tribal Housing Authority (“CTHA”) brings this action against Defendant U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) under the Administrative Procedure Act challenging the HUD’s agency action of recouping alleged over-payments of Indian Housing Block Grants (“IHBG”) to CTHA under the Native American Housing A...
Views: 0
AMENDED DECISION AND ORDER
This action was commenced by Millennium Pipeline Company, L.L.C. (“Millennium”), seeking an order pursuant to the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. § 717, et seq., granting Millennium temporary and permanent easements in certain real property (“Property”) in Chemung County, New York. The primary purpose of the easements is to allow Millennium to construct a natural gas pipel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Robert Bouvier seeks review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying his application for Social Security disability benefits (DIB) benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq. (the Act). This Court may review a final decision of the Commissioner. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). This Court GRANTS Mr. Bouvier’s ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Anthony DeFina (“DeFina” or “plaintiff’) commenced this action against Meenan Oil Company (“Meenan”), Tom Cronau (“Cronau”), and Elena Zazzera (“Zazzera”) (collectively, “defendants”) alleging that defendants violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. and Article 15 of the Executive Law of the State of New York § 296 (the “Hu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
In this diversity action, plaintiff Howard Gale brings a variety of common-law tort claims arising from his hip replacement surgery on May 6, 2008. Specifically, plaintiff brings claims for medical malpractice, negligence, and breach of warranty against medical practice Specialty Orthopaedics, PLLC; public hospital Sound Shore Medical Center of Westchester (“SSMC”); physicia...
Views: 0
*466
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Jabbar Collins was incarcerated by state authorities for more than 16 years. On June 9, 2010, Judge Irizarry of this Court issued a writ of habeas corpus ordering the dismissal of the indictment and his immediate release.
Collins now seeks damages stemming from the wrongful deprivation of his liberty. Proceeding under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law, he sues two memb...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court are Defendant SimplexGrinnell LP’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 115) and Plaintiff TIG Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Exclusion 4 (Doc. 120), Motion for Summary Judgment on Exclusion 7 (Doc. 122), Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Defendant’s Affirmative Defense Asserting Estoppel (Doc. 124), and Motion to Strike the Affidavit ...
Views: 1
Page 21233
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the Court in this civil rights action is the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. (Doc. 26). The Motion has been fully briefed and is thus ripe for our review. Because we conclude that the Plaintiffs have failed to state facts to support any of the claims in their Amended Complaint, we will grant the said Motion in its entirety.
I. PROCEDURA...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S DAUBERT MOTION TO EXCLUDE CAUSATION TESTIMONY AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT In June 2011, while this action was pending in the Middle District of Tennessee for pretrial proceedings as part of MDL No. 1760 (In re Aredia and Zometa Products Liability Litigation), defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. filed a Daubert motion to exclude specific causation testimony of pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Dalzell Management Company, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “Dalzell”) brings this action alleging a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(C) (the “CFAA”), and six state law claims arising out of the alleged wrongful eviction of Plaintiff by the Defendants. Defendants move to dismiss the Complaint based on the abstention doctrine of Colorado Riv...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE AND MOTION TO DISMISS
Pending before the Court are two motions filed on July 3, 2012, by Defendants Raenee Robinson, Ray Charles Robinson, Jr., Sheila Robinson, David Robinson, Robert F. Robinson, Reatha Butler, and Robyn Moffett: a Motion to Strike Plaintiffs State-Law Causes of Action Pursuant to California’s Anti-SLAPP Law (Docket No. 15); and a Motion to...
Views: 2
ORDER
The matter before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment or, Alternatively, Partial Summary Judgment (“Motion for Summary Judgment”), filed by Defendant National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA (“National Union”). (ECF No. 24).
I. Background
On June 10, 2011, Plaintiff LMA North America, Inc. (“LMA”) initiated this action by filing a Complaint in this Court against Nati...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the Court on cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings. A hearing was held on these matters before the undersigned on January 22, 2013, at Elizabeth City, North Carolina. For the reasons discussed below, the decision of the Commissioner is reversed. BACKGROUND Plaintiff brought this action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) for review of the final decision...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the court on Defendant Karen Montague’s (1) motion for summary judgment against Plaintiff Keith Vaughn (Mot. (Dkt. # 14)); (2) Ms. Montague’s motion to strike the declaration of Randolph Wills (Wills Decl. (Dkt. # 18-1)), made pursuant to Local Rule 7(g) (see Reply (Dkt. # 2...
Views: 0
*268
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND [Dkt. #12], DEFENDANT’S PETITION FOR EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY [Dkt. #13], AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS [Dkt. # 15]
I. Introduction
On March 7, 2012, Barbara Speranza (“Speranza”) brought this action in Connecticut Superior Court seeking recompense for the death of her husband, Robert Speranza, allegedly caused by the...
Views: 0
*855MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 23). For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES the Motion.
Statement of Facts
Plaintiff Batina Adkins, acting individually and as next friend and guardian for her infant son Draven Robertson, commenced the instant litigation on January 17, 2012. Compl., ECF No. 1. Plaintiff alleges that Valley...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion (ECF No. 50) to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). The parties presented oral argument regarding the motion to dismiss on January 16, 2013, in Huntington. For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 50). Also pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to f...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant Municipality of Guayanilla’s (“defendant Municipality”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) (Docket No. 10.) Having considered the arguments in the motion to dismiss, (Docket No. 10), and Rosana M. Ruiz-Albino’s (“plaintiff Ruiz”) opposition, (Docket No. 15), the Court GRANTS defendant Municipalit...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 8) filed by Plaintiff V’Guara Inc. (“Plaintiff’).
I. BACKGROUND
This case arises from Plaintiffs ownership of certain trade secrets related to the production and bottling of Guaraña Vodka. (See Mot. for TRO, Ex. 1 (“Wierzbowski Deck”) ¶ 8, ECF No. 8.) Specifically, Defendant Steve Dec (“Dec”), formerly ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment1 filed by Defendant L & M Bo-Truc Rental, Inc. (“L & M”), wherein it seeks the dismissal of Plaintiff Joe Snyder’s claims for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees for failure to pay maintenance and cure and for punitive damages under general maritime law for failure to pay maintenance and cure, gross negl...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) Criminal No. 06-171
v» )
) .»- t
CARL MICHAEAL TAYLOR, ) F 1 L E D
) __ U
Defendant. ) l 5
'
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is defendant Carl Michael Taylor's Motion [56] to Reduce Sentence
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Upon consideration of defendant's Motion [56] to Reduce
Sentence, defendant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for review in this breach of contract case is the motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Key Government Finance, Inc. (“KGF”). (ECF No. 17).1 The issues' have been fully briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing being deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6. For the following reasons, the motion for summary judgment will be granted in part and ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION1
Virtual Solutions, LLC (‘Virtual”) brings this action against Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”). Virtual claims that Microsoft has infringed on claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8-9, and 22 of U.S. Patent No. 6,507,353 (“the '353 Patent”), of which Virtual is the exclusive licensee. Microsoft now moves *554for summary judgment on the grounds that claims 1 and 8 of the '353 ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CARL A. BARNES, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CHRIS MOSQUERA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Judy Lynn Culver (“Ms. Culver”) brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2006), Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act. She seeks review of a final adverse decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”), who denied her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”).1 Ms. Culve...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 53).1 The motion has been fully briefed and is properly under submission before the court. (Docs. 54, 57 & 58). This case stems from an interaction between plaintiff and several City of Birmingham police officers that resulted in plaintiff being hit with a Taser and arrested for drinking in public...
Views: 0
Page 21870
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Basheen Rush, brings this action against the following defendants: Brian Fischer, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”); Dr. Lester Wright, former Deputy Commissioner and Chief Medical Officer of DOCCS; Nurse Diana Weed; Nurse Practitioner Jill Northrop; Dr. John Alves; Michael Sheahan, Southport Correct...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Six Vermont residents, Agnes Clift, Amy Cochran, Molly Jesse, Rita Mantone, Bridget Mount, and Jean Osborne (the “Plaintiffs”) have brought facial and as-applied challenges to the constitutionality of Burlington Code § 21-113(2) (the “Ordinance”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Ordinance creates a fixed buffer zone extending 35 feet from the premises of a reproductive h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
In this action, Plaintiff SenoRx, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “SenoRx”) has filed a Complaint alleging two counts of patent infringement against Defendant Hologic, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Hologic”). (D.I. 1) Presently before the Court is Hologic’s Motion to Bifurcate and Stay Discovery and Trial of Damages and Willfulness Issues (“the Motion” or “Motion to Bifurcate”). (D.I. 15) For the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This lawsuit concerns the School District of Philadelphia’s (the “School District”) treatment of, and policies governing, school children with autism. The four (4) named plaintiffs in the purported class action lawsuit, P.V., M.M., J.V., and R.S.,1 are all autistic students at Richmond Elementary School, a Kindergarten through Grade 5 (“K-5”) school in the Philadelphia School Distric...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BERNARD MATTHEWS, et al.
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 09-2206 (JDB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
NARDYNE JEFFERIES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court for oral argument on Plaintiffs’ pending Motions to Remand [ECF No. 23]. Plaintiffs have brought actions against numerous brand name and generic pharmaceutical manufacturers (collectively referred to as “Wyeth Defendants” or “Defendants”), seeking damages for personal injuries suffered as a result of being exposed to the prescription drug R...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff APR, LLC brings this lawsuit against defendants American Aircraft Sales, Inc. and Jet Tolbert for injuries arising out of the purchase of a Cessna aircraft facilitated by American Aircraft and Tolbert. APR asserts a number of state-law claims, including breach of fiduciary duties, promissory estoppel, negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent suppression, un...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Def.’s Mot., Docket Number (“DN”) 5.) The Plaintiffs have responded. (Pis.’ Resp., DN 6.) The Defendant has replied. (Def.’s Reply, DN 9.) Having considered the matter and being fully advised, the Defendant’s motion is DENIED.
I.
In Thies v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 804 F.Supp.2d 560 (W.D.Ky.2011), t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ motion to reopen the case and establish a scheduling order. (Pls.’ Mot., Docket Number (“DN”) 89.) The Defendant has responded. (Def.’s Resp., DN 91.) The Plaintiffs have replied. (Pls.’ Reply, DN 94.) Having considered the matter and being fully advised, the Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.
I.
In this action arising und...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the following motions: 1) SUPPLYONE’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Plaintiffs’ First Claim for Relief (Quasi-Contract Claim) (Doc. 20); 2) SUPPLY-ONE’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs’ Third (Fraud) and Fourth (Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices) Claims for Relief (Doc. 26); 3) SUPPLY-ONE’s Motion for Summary J...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARIO E. VILLABONA-ALVARADO, )
Plaintiff, §
v. § Civil Case N0. 11-2071 (RJL)
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, g
Defendant. § F I L E D
FEB 1 9 2013
MEMoRANDUM oPINIoN _ .
February 2013 [# 61 @(i'§ii§ i¢§'rtii`iii§iii§i?,i'é'fi»iiii»i@
Plaintiff Mario E. Villabona-Alvarado filed this lawsuit pro se against the Federal
Bureau of Prisons ("B...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Vicky Sloth (“Sloth”), brings this employment discrimination claim against the defendants claiming that she was sexually harassed during the entire course of her 28-year employment with defendant Constellation Brands, (“Constellation”) and retaliated against for complaining of sexual harassment. By Decision and Order dated June 8, 2012, 883 F.Supp.2d 35...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Isidoro Rivera, Jose Alvarado, Juan Bustillo, Noberto Alvarez, Elsa Mejia Villalobo, Brian Fredericks, Eli Chavez, Marta Villatoro, and Ana Maria Mora Gomez (collectively, “plaintiffs”) originally commenced this action alleging that: (1) defendant Village of Farmingdale (the “Village”) violated the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq. (the “FHA”); and (2) de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is the appeal of Michael D. Carroll, filed March 16, 2012. After consideration of the briefs, reply, record on appeal, and the applicable law, the court affirms the judgment of the bankruptcy court entered on January 3, 2012.
I. Background
This case arises out of the unsuccessful sale of a Salad Bowl Franchise by Michael David Carroll (“Carroll” or ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Five motions to dismiss, fully briefed, and on which, with one exception, oral argument was received December 12, 2012, come now before the court.1 These include motion directed to count one of the indictment, alleging a conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (DE # 238), joined in by all five defendants, including Gary Jackson (“Jackson”), William Wheeler Mathews, Jr. (“Mathews”), Andre...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................483
II. LEGAL STANDARD FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION..................486
III. APPLICABLE LAW.....................................................487
A. Sources of Liability...................................................487
B. The Fourth Amendment, Stops, and Reasonable Suspicion.................488
C. Crimin...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) commenced this action against Uriel Sharef, Ulrich Bock, Carlos Sergi, Stephan Signer, Herbert Steffen, Andres Truppel, and Bernd Regendantz (“defendants”), former senior executives at Siemens Aktiengesellschaft (“Siemens”), a multinational engineering and electronics conglomerate headquartered in Germany. The SEC ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) brings this action against Defendants Elek Straub, Andras Balogh, and Tamas Morvai (collectively, “Defendants”) — executives of the Hungarian telecommunications company Magyar Telekom, Pic. (“Magyar”)- — arising out of alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-l, et s...
Views: 0
Page 22470
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
From 2004 to 2007, Defendants Golden Empire Schools Financing Authority and Kern High School District (collectively, “Golden Empire”) issued approximately $125 million of complex securities to fund projects, employing Plaintiff Goldman, Sachs & Co. (“Goldman”) as the sole underwriter and broker. In 2012, Golden Empire initiated an arbitration before the Financial Industry Reg...
Views: 0
*645DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING IN FULL THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. # 37); SUSTAINING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND (DOC. # 15); REMANDING CASE TO CLARK COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS; TERMINATION ENTRY On January 24, 2013, Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman issued a Report and Recommendation, Doc. #37, recommending that the Court sustain Plaintiffs Motion to ...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion
I. Introduction
Plaintiff, AMCO Insurance Company (“AMCO”) filed this action as Subrogee of its insured Star Hotels, Inc. (“Star Hotels”), against Defendants, Emery & Associates, Inc. (“Emery”), Premier Hospitality Group-Kittanning, L.P. (“Premier”), General Hospitality, Inc. (“General”) and Kratsa Corporation (“Kratsa”) (collectively “Defendants”), to recover monies paid as ...
Views: 0
Page 22521
ORDER
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by The Stolar Partnership, LLP (“Stolar”) and James Bryant (“Bryant”) (collectively “Defendants”). Clerk’s No. 71. Marcus Mills (“Mills” or “Plaintiff’) filed a resistance to the Motion (Clerk’s No. 94) and Defendants replied (Clerk’s No. 101). The Court held a hearing on the Motion on August 3, 2012. Clerk’s No. 103. Following the he...
Views: 0
Page 22522
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
There are three plaintiffs in this case: Brenda Umholtz, Paul Levy and Tina Bruce. Plaintiff Umholtz was the sole plaintiff when this case was originally filed. Plaintiff Levy was added in an amended complaint filed March 2, 2011 and plaintiff Bruce was added in an amended complaint filed April 6, 2011. All three plaintiffs bring claims under the Americans with Disabilities...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
JOHN R. MILLER, JR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
WILLIAM I. DUDLEY, JR. )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”), has filed a Motion to Dismiss in Part Plaintiffs’ Complaint or in the Alternative to Strike Class Claims (Docket No. 19) (“Partial Motion to Dismiss”), to which the plaintiffs have filed a Response in opposition (Docket No. 35), and the defendants have filed a Reply (Docket No. 39). The court heard oral argument on the motion on Janu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Ann Darlene Wells (plaintiff), as representative of the estate of Donald L. Wells (Wells), sued the City of Chicago and a number of Chicago police officers and employees under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for claims arising from his arrest, confinement, and death. In April 2012, a jury returned a verdict for plaintiff against the City and four of the defendant officers on plain...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Presently before the court is Lawrence Michaels’ (“petitioner”) application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.1.1) Petitioner is a Delaware inmate in custody at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center, Delaware. For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application. IÍ. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1 During the afterno...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
On October 1, 2008, Claimant Douglas Misener applied for Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”),1 [DE 1 ¶ 6], alleging a disability onset date of June 27, 2006. He claimed he was disabled due to symptoms associated with bi-polar disorder; attention deficit disorder; attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; depression; bila...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Kaitlin Michelle Ferguson pled guilty to one count of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The charge was based on Ferguson’s involvement in a scheme to secure lines of credit through unauthorized use of the retail store Cold-water Creek’s banking account. At sentencing, Ferguson requested a downward “variance” from the advisory 10-to-16 month term of custody calculated ...
Views: 0
ORDER
After an independent review of the file, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court that:
1. The plaintiffs objection (Doc. # 131) to the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed on January 31, 2013 are overruled;
2. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 129) entered on January 16, 2013 is adopted;
3. The defendant’s Motion for summary Judgment (Doc. # 122) is GRAN...
Views: 0
ENTRY ON MOTION TO EXCLUDE This cause comes before the Court on Mirowski’s Motion to Exclude Expert Opinions of W. Todd Schoettelkotte (Dkt. No. 213). The motion is fully briefed, and the Court, being duly advised, rules as follows on the motion. I. STANDARD Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), established the standard for determinin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Following a twelve-day bench trial in November 2010, the Court held that Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs John J. Waters and Gerard L. Cafesjian were entitled to indemnification from Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Armenian Genocide Museum & Memorial, Inc. (“AGM & M”) for legal expenses incurred in defending claims asserted against Waters and Cafesjian in their capacities as former of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THE ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY OF
AMERICA, INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants,
Civil Action Nos. 07-1259, 08-255, 08-1254
v. (CKK)
GERARD L. CAFESJIAN, et al...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 10-106 (-2, 5) (RMC)
)
FRANCISCO JOSE VALDERRAMA ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
BARBARA FOX, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Ac...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ROBERT DARNBROUGH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 11-1862(EGS)
v. )
)
U...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
G.G. et al., :
A minor, by his parents and next friends, :
Richard and Victoria Gersten, :
:
Plaintiffs, : Civil Action N...
Views: 0
ORDER ON RULE 29(C) AND RULE 33 MOTIONS
The defendant has filed two post-verdict motions: a motion for judgment of acquittal pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 29(c), and a motion for new trial pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 33. (Filing 186) For the reasons explained below, the Court will deny both motions.
RULE 29(C) MOTION
On a motion for post-verdict acquittal, the Court views the evidence in the light mos...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This civil matter is before the Court on defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Noninfringement [Doc. 35], in which defendants move the Court to dismiss plaintiffs claims of patent infringement. Plaintiff submitted a response [Doc. 37], to which defendants submitted a reply [Doc. 38]. The Court has considered the pending motion, the responsive pleadings, and supporting ex...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22948: Operaciones Tecnicas Marinas S.A.S. v. Diversified Marine Services, LLC
Page 22948
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Diversified Marine Services, LLC’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs fraud claim for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED.
Background
This case arises from a failed maritime voyage.
Operaciones Técnicas Marinas (“OTM”) is a marine operating company based in Cartagena, Colombia. OTM purcha...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendant Edward Charles Hicks pled guilty to one count of theft of a firearm from a federal firearms licensee in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(u) and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). At sentencing, he requested a downward ‘variance’ from the 33-to-41 month range of custody calculated pursuant to the United States Sentencing Guide...
Views: 0
Page 22953
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the third-party defendants’ motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration. For the reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED.
Background
This dispute arises out of the salvage of a damaged vessel.
The MONCLA 101, owned and operated by Monda Marine Operators, LLC, is a “work-over barge” or “post-drilling rig,” used to drive pilings and posts in mariti...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RAYMOND V. ELLIS, SR. )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 12-1102(EGS)
v. )
)
CAPITALS...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is an immigration lawsuit brought by Plaintiffs Elizabeth Namarra (“Elizabeth”), Ephraim Olani (“Olani”), and Aster Namarra (“Aster”), against Defendant Alejandro Mayorkas in his official capacity as Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services (“USCIS”) and Defendant Janet Napolitano in her official capacity as the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the agency...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter appears before the Court on a petition filed by the Cleveland International Fund (“CIF”) asking the Court to adjudicate the parties’ interests in payments that are due and owing to CIF through development projects with Flats East Hotel, LLC (“Flats East”) and University Hospitals Health System, Inc. (“UH”). CIF filed its petition on December 28, 2012. On January 17, 2013, the G...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
On January 21, 2013, Plaintiff Avery Dennison Corp. filed a Verified Complaint seeking a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, and damages against r-pac International Corp. and Mark Juhasz. (Doc. No. 1). Avery Dennison asserts claims against *895Juhasz for breach of contract, against both Defendants for misappropriation...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court is Defendants Larksville Borough, Joseph Zawadski, Tony Kopko, and John Pekarovsky’s (collectively “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 56.) Plaintiff Scott E. Kocher, a former Larksville Borough police officer, claims that he was retaliated against in violation of his First Amendment rights, deprived of a protected *587Fourteenth Amendment libe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[Dkt. Nos. 35 & 45]
Presently before the court is Defendants Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Services LLC (collectively “Amazon”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment.1 Having considered the parties’ submissions and heard oral argument, the court adopts the following order.
I. BACKGROUND
The following facts are not disputed or confidential.
Multi Time M...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Mark Lester instituted this action against defendants J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) and Washington Mutual Bank (‘WaMu”) to, among other things, stop Chase from foreclosing on his home. See generally Complaint, ECF No. I.1 Chase now moves to dismiss Mr. Lester’s complaint ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
ANTHOINE PLUNKETT, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Rodney Hailey (“Mr. Hailey”) was convicted of wire fraud, money laundering, and Clean Air Act violations, and the Court has ordered preliminary forfeiture. Mr. Hailey’s wife, Tracey Oliver Hailey (“Mrs. Hailey”), claims an interest in some of the forfeited property. Pending are the government’s motions to compel compliance with discovery under 21 U.S.C. § 853(m), to dismiss Mrs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a motion by Plaintiffs, Armstrong Coal Co., Inc. & Armstrong Fabricators, Inc., for a preliminary injunction [DN 14], on a motion by Defendants, United States Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration, Jim W. Langley, William Cook, III, and Wendell Crick, to dismiss this action [DN 16], and on a motion by Plaintiffs ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRENDA WHORTON, .
.
Plaintiff, .
. Civil Action No.: 1:11-cv-01291-RC
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
REYMUNDO Z. MENDOZA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 11-1790 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
HILDA SOLIS,
United States Secretar...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOSE LUIS MALDONADO,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1473 (BAH)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Judge Beryl A. Howell
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is the second motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Cleco Corporation (“Cleco”), seeking dismissal of all remaining claims alleged by the plaintiff, Eddie Culbert (“Culbert”). See Record Document 122. Based on the following, Cleco’s second motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND1
Culbert, along with twelve other current and former A...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, DEFENDANT NCL AMERICA’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Defendant NCL America LLC’s (“NCL”) Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [DE 39]. Plaintiff alleges that while he was a passenger on Defendant NCL America’s (“NCL”) ship, Pride of America, he suffered a heart attack during an excursion in Volcanoes Nat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Randy Jackson pursues claims against Dunn Construction Company (“Dunn”) for discrimination, retaliation, and hostile *1233work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) and § 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. § 1981. See doc. 1. Jackson also seeks relief under state law for alleged negligent su...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment [DE 43]. For the reasons stated below, the defendants’ motion is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of a dispute over the bidding process and contract award for a City of Clinton construction project. The project, partly funded by a USDA grant, included moving underground utilities, street resurfacing, and ...
Views: 0
ORDER
(Motion to Dismiss or Motion for a More Definite Statement — dkt. no. 6)
I. SUMMARY
Before the Court is Defendant Ramparts, Inc., d/b/a Luxor Hotel Casino’s (“LHC”) Motion to Dismiss or Motion for More Definite Statement. (Dkt. no. 6.) For the reasons stated below, the Motion to Dismiss is granted, and the Motion for a More Definite Statement is denied as moot.
II. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Anth...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the Court are a number of motions, including Intel’s Daubert *141Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Larry Evans (D.I.191), Intel’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Damages (D.I.161), and Intel’s Motion in Limine (D.I. 240, Ex. 15, Motion in Limine # 2, p. 3) to exclude testimony of Joseph Tran, an inventor of the ’547 patent. Evans’ proposed testimony — that...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CAROL GRUNEWALD, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-cv-1738 (RLW)
JONATHAN B. JARVIS, DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, et al.,
Defendants.
ME...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on defendant Ford Motor Company’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 22.), which the Court grants, and Ms. Kuns’ motion to amend the complaint to cure jurisdictional defects (Doc. 32), which the Court also grants.
Ms. Kuns purchased a new 2010 Mercury Mariner from a Ford dealer in Vermillion, Ohio. The following winter, when a family member clos...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court are: (1) the motion of defendants Karen Brenner and Fortuna Asset Management, LLC (“FAM”) to compel arbitration; (2) the plaintiffs’ motion to strike a portion of the defendants’ reply brief; and (3) defendant Michael Horrell’s motion to dismiss. For the reasons explained below, we grant the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in part and deny it in part...
Views: 0
Page 23914
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This appeal arises from the denial of Eduardo Santa’s application for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits (“SSDI”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). Following the denial of his claim, Mr. Santa requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). The ALJ issued a decision finding that Mr. Santa was not disabled. (Tr. 11-20.)
In reaching his conclu...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Techno-TM LLC (“Techno-TM”) brings this breach of contract action against Fire-away, Inc. (“Fireaway”). The sole basis for federal jurisdiction is diversity of citizenship. For the reasons that follow, Techno-TM’s complaint is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
BACKGROUND
Techno-TM filed its complaint on May 24, 2012, and asserted jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending is the defendant’s renewed “Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or, in the Alternative, for a New Trial” (doc. no. 108). Plaintiff opposes the motion. Having fully considered the record, including the trial evidence, the parties’ briefs, and applicable authority, the Court will deny the motion for the following reasons:
I. Background
Plaintiff, a locomotive engineer, filed hi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
ACA Galleries, Inc. (“ACA”), a New York corporation, sues Joseph Kinney, a citizen of North Carolina, for selling it a forged Milton Avery painting. The complaint contains three claims. Although count one alleges breach of contract, ACA’s papers in support of its motion for summary judgment disclose that ACA is really seeking rescission of the contract under the doctrine of mu...
Views: 0
ORDER REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT AND DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
[DKT. NOs. 4-5]
On July 18, 2012, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Wells Fargo Bank and World Savings Bank in San Diego Superi- or Court asserting eleven causes of action, all under California state law. On August 20, 2012, Defendant Wells Fargo removed the action to federal district court. (Dkt. No. 1.) On A...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand. Doc. 5. On February 5, 2013, the Court convened a hearing and ruled from the bench. The Court GRANTED Plaintiffs Motion and now issues this Opinion and Order setting forth the reasons for its ruling in further detail.
I. Relevant Factual Background and Procedural History
Eddie Campbell (“Plaintiff’), a North Car...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the motion for reconsideration filed by the defendants, Thomas LaRose (“LaRose”) and Virginia State University. In its previous *276Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court declined to dismiss the plaintiffs race discrimination claim against LaRose, brought under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Ame...
Views: 0
Page 24049
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lindsay Lohan (“plaintiff’) commenced this action against defendants Armando Christian Perez (a/k/a Pitbull) (“Perez”), Shaffer Chimere Smith, Jr. (a/ k/a Ne-Yo) (“Smith”), Nick Van de Wall (a/k/a Afrojack) (“Van de Wall”), J. Records, Sony Music Entertainment, Sony Music Holdings Inc., RCA Music Group, Polo Grounds Music, Polo Grounds Music Publishing, Inc., Polo G...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CONCESIONARIA DOMINICANA DE
AUTOPISTAS Y CARRETERAS, S.A.,
Petitioner,
Civil Action No. 12-cv-1335 (RLW)
v.
THE DOMINICAN STATE,
Respondent.
M...
Views: 0
Page 24103
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Arrello Barnes, proceeding pro se, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Barnes is a mentally ill inmate in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”). Defendant Fischer is Commissioner of DOCCS. Defendants Ross, Smith, Mahmud, and Yildiz are employees of the New York State Office of Mental Health. Construi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs Galderma Laboratories, L.P., Galderma S.A., and Galderma Research & Development, S.N.C.’s (collectively “Galderma”) Motion to Disqualify Vinson & Elkins, LLP (Doc. No. 18). The Court conducted a hearing *393on this motion on October 28, 2012. The Court has reviewed the motion, the parties’ briefs, the appendices and supplemental append...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND; (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING AS MOOT IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TRANSFER OR, IN THE FURTHER ALTERNATIVE, STAY PROCEEDINGS PENDING RULINGS IN FIRST-FILED CASE
On February 15, 2013, the Court heard Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Transfer or, in the further Alternative, Stay Proceedings P...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER ACTION TO THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA; (2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS’ ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS; (3) DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; AND (i) DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REFERRAL TO MEDIATION
On February 15, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff N...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff David Earl Watkins (“Mr. Watkins”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2006), Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act. He seeks review of a final adverse decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”), who denied his application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”).1 M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Donald Bredbenner (“plaintiff’), a former inmate at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (“VCC”), Smyrna, Delaware, filed his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He proceeds pro se and has been granted leave to proceed without prepayment of fees. Presently before the court are several discovery motions (D.I. 45, 55, 56, 59, 84) filed by plaintiff...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
ROBERT E. REIVER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
Page 24231
OPINION AND ORDER
In this patent infringement case, the defendants have moved for summary judgment based on alleged invalidity of the patent, and the plaintiff has moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of infringement of one of the patent’s twenty-seven claims. Additionally, the defendants have moved to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs damages expert and also seek partial summary...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Thomas County, Georgia’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 20). For the reasons stated below, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In October 2006, Plaintiff Sheletha Foster (“Plaintiff’) was hired by Defendant Thomas County (“Defendant”) as a communications officer for Thomas County E-911 (“E-911”). (Defendant’s Statement of ...
Views: 0
DECISION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Lawrence Cross (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action pro se asserting claims arising from an injury he allegedly suffered on October 2, 2007 “when a 2004 Toyota Camry Solara suddenly and unexpectedly accelerated striking plaintiff.” See 2nd Am. Compl. ¶ 11, dkt. # 36. After the Court decided State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s2 (“State Farm” o...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court are Defendants Trans-ocean, Ltd. and GlobalSantaFe Offshore Services’s, Reurged Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Rec. Doc. 64), Plaintiffs James Johnson and Robert Croke’s opposition thereto (Rec. Doc. 94), and Defendants’ reply and supplemental reply to same (Rec. Doc. 96, 171), and Plaintiffs’ surreply (Rec. Doc. 174). Also before the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On January 12, 2012, Plaintiff Terri L. Thorpe (“Plaintiff’), a resident of Tioga County, New York commenced this action pro se. Dkt. No. 1 (“Complaint”). Plaintiff names Piedmont Airlines, Inc. (“Piedmont”), Ronald Hynes (“Hynes”), William Rocco (“Rocco”), and Michelle Foose (“Foose”) as Defendants in this case. Id. at 2. Defendant Hynes is a resid...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Terry Burke, personal representative of the estate of Berniece Hermsen, brought this claim against defendants alleging breach of contract, bad faith, fraud and misrepresentation, and RICO violations stemming from the scope of cov*1060erage of Hermsen’s long-term care insurance policy. Docket 31. Defendants, Ability Resources Holdings, Inc., Ability Reinsura...
Views: 0
*290
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants Mayor and City Council of Baltimore (“City”) and individually named City Employees’ (“City Employees”) (collectively the “Defendants”) Motion to Vacate Grant of Extension of Time to Effect Service of Process and to Dismiss the Complaint or, in the Alternative, to Dismiss the Complaint for Insufficient Service of Process. (ECF...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure gives the plaintiff or, after an answer or motion for summary judgment has been served, the parties the right to dismiss an action without the oversight or approval of the Court, subject to certain enumerated provisions of other Federal Rules, or “any applicable federal statute.” The Court has raised the issue, sua...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiff Tiffany Ryan, a former Assistant Branch Manager of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”), brings this putative collective action alleging defendants violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219. Specifically, plaintiff alleges defendants failed to compensate her and others similarly situated for lawful overtime wages.
Defendants move to dismis...
Views: 4
OPINION AND ORDER The Court considers here whether a United States Magistrate Judge in con*280ducting a hearing pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and after accepting a defendant’s guilty plea is required under 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a) to order the defendant’s immediate detention.1 The undersigned United States Magistrate Judge answers this question affirmatively and ORDERS the Defenda...
Views: 0
Page 24654
PROCEEDINGS: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (filed 12/11/12)
SCI Cal. Funeral Servs., Inc. v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co., Case No. CV-12-7436GW(MANx) Tentative Ruling on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(7)
I. Background
SCI California Funeral Services, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “SCI California”) has filed suit against Westchester Fire Insurance Company (“Defendant” or “Westch...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Daniel Kirk, proceeding as qui tam relator on behalf of the United States, has alleged that requests by defendant Schindler Elevator Corp. for payment from federal agencies for construction work it performed violated the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733. Kirk does not allege that Schindler defrauded the government by requesting payments for work it did not perfor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On August 5, 2011, the Plaintiff Fairfield Financial Mortgage Group, Inc. (“the Plaintiff’), commenced this lawsuit against the Defendants James R. Luca (“Luca”), Donato Quinto (“Quinto”), Candice Giaceone, Medallion Abstract, LLC (“Medallion”), Carlo Dellapina (“Dellapina”), Michael J. Moberg (“Moberg”), Moberg & Associates, PLLC (“Moberg & Associates”), Shaw Eli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Gary R. Brown, dated October 19, 2012. International Christian Broadcasting, Inc. v. Koper, 2012 WL 5210595 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (hereinafter the “R & R”). The R & R recommends dismissal of the complaint for failure to meet the minimum amount in controversy set forth in the diversity jurisdiction sta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff Susan Rozek (“the Plaintiff’) brings this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., against the Defendants New York Blood Center (“NYBC”), NYBC in its capacity as Plan Administrator of NYBC, and First Unum Life Insurance Company (“First Unum,” and collectively, “the Defendants”). She alleges that sh...
Views: 0
Statements of Reasons for Sentences Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(2) I. Introduction Defendants Shalom Rabkin and Mendy Gorodetsky are business partners. They jointly own and operate Asbestways Services Corporation (“Asbestways”), a licensed environmental abatement company with some fifty employees located in Brooklyn, New York. See Rabkin Sentencing Hr’g Tr. 15-16. Each defendant pled guilty to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on defendant Kolon Industries, Inc.’s (“Kolon”) MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE AND TO DISMISS INDICTMENT (Docket No. 21). For the reasons set forth herein, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
On August 21, 2012, a federal grand jury returned a six count Indictment (Docket No. 3) against Kolon, as well as five individuals, Kolon’...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. # 69), and Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. # 71). Plaintiff brought this maritime survival and wrongful death suit against the M/V SAHARA and G Shipping after the death of her daughter, Lia Hawkins. Ms. Hawkins was an employee of G Shipping, th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Enrique Davila-Torres (“Plaintiff’) brings suit against his supervisor, Yesenia Feliciano-Torres (“Defendant”), alleging violations of the First Amendment, Due Process Clause, Equal Protection Clause, Fifth Amendment, and various provisions of the Puerto Rico Constitution. (See generally Docket No. 6.) Plaintiff requests preliminary and permanent injunctive relief from further...
Views: 0
Page 24853
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW I. Introduction and Background The Court tried this case with the consent of the parties and without a jury on *603October 24-25, 2012. ■ This action involves a claim brought by Petitioner Nora Lizeth Saavedra Aranda against Respondent Rosendo Elizondo Serna under a treaty known as the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abd...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant Puerto Rico Ports Authority’s motion for summary judgment. (Docket No. 186.) Having considered the motion and plaintiffs’ response, (Docket No. 206), the Court DENIES defendant PRPA’s motion.
DISCUSSION
I. Procedural Background
On October 16, 2009, plaintiff Daniel Grajales (“Grajales”), his wife Wanda Gonzalez, and their conjugal partnership1 filed...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is a self-styled motion to dismiss filed by Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Actavis Elizabeth, LLC.1 After considering the motion, response, reply, record, and governing authorities, the Court GRANTS the motion.
1. Background2
This case was originally filed in the 389th District Court, Hidalgo County, Tex*774as, on February 28, 2011.3 Petra Rojas (“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff AMEX Assurance Company (AMEX) brings this action against Defen*736dant Gary Vincent Giordano, seeking declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 as well as alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation. Pending before the Court is Giordano’s Motion to Dismiss. Doc. No. 18. The Court has reviewed the motion papers and finds that no hearing is necessary. See Local Rul...
Views: 0
RULING RE: MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 24)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs 0 & G Industries, Inc. (“0 & G”), Kleen Energy Systems, LLC (“Kleen”), Keystone Construction and Maintenance Services, Inc. (“Keystone”), and Bluewater Energy Solutions, Inc. (“Bluewater”) (collectively “Contractor Controlled Insurance Program (‘CCIP’) Participants”) bring this suit against defendant, Aon Risk Services Northeas...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The medical malpractice claims in this case arise out of the death of Rafaela Sanchez (“decedent”) following a postpartum hemorrhage. Decedent was admitted to North Shore Medical Center-Salem Hospital for the cesarean delivery of her third child on April 22, 2009 and died on April 24, 2009.
I. Factual Background
Plaintiff Angel Sanchez (“plaintiff’), decedent’s spouse and the a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DECIDING MOTION TO QUASH AND/OR PROTECTIVE ORDER [DE 31] AND PLAINTIFF JJK MINERAL COMPANY, LLC’S MOTION TO COMPEL [DE 34]
I.
Background
Joseph E. Swiger [Swiger] entered into a 1995 agreement to buy oil, gas, and mineral interests of Wangs [last name of the people who were the owners of lands and mineral interests] in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Wangs execu...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CHRISTIE Y. HERBERT,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1057 (JDB)
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS,
Secretary of the Department of
Health and Human Services,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OP...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
DERRICK CARRINGTON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ROSEMARY MCBRIDE HAINEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-cv-1725 (RLW)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Page 25042
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDERS
This action grew out of child custody and support proceedings in the Tennessee and Alabama court systems between Mark Davis, who sues as a pro se plaintiff, and his former wife, Tonya Smith Davis (now known as Blackstock), who is the mother of the child that has become the innocent, collateral casualty of their, seemingly, never-ending marital warfare. The amended co...
Views: 0
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOANNE BADGETT, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Civil Action No. 11-01363 (TFH)
v. )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This Opinion and Order addresses the discovery dispute raised in plaintiffs January 29, 2013 letter and defendant’s February 2, 2013 response [Doe. No. 14]. The dispute generally concerns plaintiffs request for “comparator” information. For the reasons to be discussed plaintiffs application is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
Background
By way of brief backgrou...
Views: 0
*784
ORDER AND OPINION
Plaintiff Midland Mortgage Company (“Plaintiff’) filed this action for damages, alleging state law claims for negligence and negligent misrepresentation against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Defendant”). (ECF No. 24, pp. 4-5.) This matter is before the court on Defendant’s motions to dismiss and for summary judgment on the claims asserted against it by Plaintiff. (Se...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [Dkt. ##13,17, 21]
Before the Court is the Plaintiffs, Ron-dell Miley (“Miley”), motion to remand this action to Connecticut Superior Court, asserting that his claim under the Connecticut Workers’ Compensation Act is non-removable. Also ...
Views: 0
ORDER The Wanes executed an Adjustable Rate Mortgage and Note in 2006, and, after several years of making scheduled payments, have become disenchanted with their lender, Bank United, N.A.1 The Wanes sought to rescind their Mortgage when their monthly payments were scheduled to increase from $1,213.05 to $3,264.29, and thereafter, ceased their remittance of Mortgage payments altogether.2 When not...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________
)
REGINALD MOORE, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 00-953 (RWR/DAR)
)
JANET NAPOLITANO, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) (ECF No. 15) by Plaintiffs Janet Kimble and Tyrone Kimble (collectively “Plaintiffs”). Plaintiffs bring a claim against Defendant Douglas County School District RE-1 (“Defendant”) under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”) and Title II of the Am...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Raphael Ware pursues claims against Supreme Beverage Company, Inc. (“SBC”) for discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) and § 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866.1 See doc. 1. Based on this court’s review of the evi*1247dence and the law, Ware failed to establi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ORDER REVERSING DECISION OF COMMISSIONER AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ORDER AFFIRMING DECISION OF COMMISSIONER (Dkt. Nos. 8 & 16)
I. INTRODUCTION
This action seeks review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Plaintiffs applications for Social Security disability insurance benefits. Plaintiff applied...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause, alleging in a Third Amended Complaint (instrument # 169) misappropriation of trade secrets, civil conspiracy for the alleged misappropriation, and copyright infringement and seeking a permanent injunction and declaratory judgment, are inter alia the following “renewed” motions for partial summary judgment1:
1. Defendants ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, Kearon Lehman, by his attorneys, Frederick A. Raab, and Mignini & Raab LLP, filed this action seeking judicial review, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“the Commissioner”), who denied plaintiffs claim for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act (“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the ancillary petitions filed by former clients of the Defendant James W. “Bill” Bailey, Jr., a financial advisor who has admitted to engaging in a massive Ponzi scheme to defraud investors of millions of dollars over the course of a decade. The Petitioners whose matters are addressed by this Order forwarded funds from their in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff Mona T. Kanciper (the “Plaintiff’ or “Kanciper”) commenced this civil rights action on April 30, 2012, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, et seq. (“Section 1983”), as well as Article IV, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution and Section 30 of the New York State Executive Law, stemming from the execution of a search warrant on her property by the ag...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, P.W. and D.W., individually, and as parents and guardians of H.W., a minor, (“Plaintiffs”), bring this action against the Fairport Central School District (the “District”), John Hunter, Superintendent of the District, David Dunn, Principal at the Martha Brown Middle School (“Martha Brown”), Nicholas Cocilova, a counselor at Martha Brown, Brent Provenza...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant Vicinay Cadenas S.A.’s Motion to Stay Pending Arbitration Under Section 3 of the FAA, Defendant Vicinay Cadenas S.A.’s Motion for a Stay of Discovery and *688Other Obligations Pending Resolution of Its Motion to Stay Pending Arbitration, and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. After considering the motions, submissions, and applicable law...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss based on Rule 25 with Supporting Memorandum of Law (Doe. No. 63), filed on January 15, 2013, and Plaintiff James McGuinness’ (“Plaintiff’) response thereto (Doc. No. 65), filed on January 29, 2013.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff passed away on April 11, 2012 (Doc. No. 56); however,...
Views: 0
ORDER UPHOLDING CONSTITUTIONALITY OF CHAPTER 807 OF THE REVISED CODE OF THE CONSOLIDATED CITY AND COUNTY OF INDIANAPOLIS
This matter was tried to the Court on October 17-19, 2012, presenting the constitutional issues arising under the First and Fourteenth Amendments relating to Chapter 807 of the Revised Code of the Consolidated City and County of Indianapolis (“City-County Code”), which ordinanc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Bank of America, N.A. (“plaintiff’ or “Bank of America”) commenced this diversity action against Mark Fischer (“Fischer”) and Wayne Wahrsager (“Wahrsager”) (collectively, the “defendants”) for breaching their guaranties in connection with a $17.5 million loan to New York Merchants Protective Co., Inc. (“NYMP”), a company owned and controlled by the defendants.1 Presently be...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is the second motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Cleco Corporation (“Cleco”), seeking dismissal of all remaining claims alleged by the plaintiff, Ronald Smith, Sr. (“Smith”). See Record Document 122. Based on the following, Cleco’s second motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND1
Smith began his employment at Cleco in 2000 as a Cr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is the second motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Cleco Corporation (“Cleco”), seeking dismissal of all remaining claims alleged by the plaintiff, Vanda Willis (‘Willis”). See Record Document 119. Based on the following, Cleco’s second motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND1
Originally, Willis, along with twelve other current and...
Views: 1
Page 25526
Memorandum & Order
I. Introduction
Plaintiff GFE Global Finance & Engineering Ltd. (“GFE”) moves to amend its complaint as to causes of action against defendant ECI and dismiss without prejudice its claims against defendants Trilini International Ltd. (“Trilini”) and Roman Katsnelson (“Katsnelson”). PL Mot., Docket Entry 40. More specifically, plaintiff seeks to narrow its complaint against ECI...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Christina Cinaglia sued Dennis Paul Benevicz for her injuries from a boating accident. Pending are Beneviez’s motion in limine to exclude the testimony of Captain Richard Dein and Cinaglia’s motion in limine to exclude Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (“DXA”) scans and certain opinions of Louis S. Halikman, M.D. under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.1 For the following r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Through the present action, Halema Buzayan and the Buzayan family seek damages as a result of events stemming from hit-and-run charges levied against Halema as a result of an incident which allegedly occurred in Davis, California, on June 7, 2005. Presently before the Court are cross-motions for partial summary judgment brought with respect to two of the claims brought by Pla...
Views: 0
Page 25655
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
OXBOW CARBON & MINERALS LLC, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. # 24) IN ITS ENTIRETY; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS (DOC. #20); AWARDING PLAINTIFF THE SUM OF $4,355.00 IN ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; AND TERMINATION ENTRY
The Court has reviewed the January 29, 2013 Report and Recommendation of United States M...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOR )
ENVIRONMENTAL )
RESPONSIBILITY, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action arises from the allegation that Defendants, United States Department of Labor (“USDOL”) and Hilda Solis (“Solis”), United States Secretary of Labor, through the Administrative Review Board1 (“ARB”) acted unlawfully under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. Plaintiff, Pythagoras General Contracting Corp. (“Plaintiff’ or “Pythagoras”),...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR A TRO AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION This matter is before the Court on Defendant AdvoCare International, LP’s (“AdvoCare”) Motion and Memorandum in Support of Request for a TRO and Preliminary Injunction. AdvoCare seeks an or-, der restraining and enjoining Limitless Worldwide, LLC (“Limitless”) from usi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Early Termination of Supervised Release, filed September 24, 2012 (Doc. 43)(“Motion for Early Termination”). The Court held a hearing on November 2, 2012. The primary issue is whether the Court should terminate Defendant Jerry Sedillo Gutierrez’ term of supervised release early. The Court will deny Defe...
Views: 0
*1192MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence Based on Spoliation or Incompleteness, filed June 26, 2012 (Doc. 75)(“Motion to Suppress”). The Court held an evidentiary hearing on September 19, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court should suppress the text messages that Defendant Myron Harry sent to Dimitri Waunek...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Dowell brought this § 1983 action against Christopher Bartlett, Joseph Eagan, Rodney Boyer, Harry Dilworth, William Carson, and Lincoln County, Missouri. Dowell was acquitted of murder charges, and he seeks damages related to his interrogation, arrest, and prosecution on those and related charges. Defendants have moved for summary judgment on all claims. A...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Motion to Strike Notice of Completion of Briefing on Summary Judgment Filed by Denny’s Inc., filed November 27, 2012 (Doc. 44)(“Motion to Strike”). The Court held a hearing on January 7, 2013. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court should strike Defendant Denny’s, Inc., Notice of Completion of Briefing, filed November...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the United States’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed July 16, 2012 (Doc. 66); (ii) the Defendants’ Motion for Leave of Court to Reply to Plaintiffs’ Reply to Hopkins’ Response to Motion for Summary Judgment, filed September 4, 2012 (Doc. 106) (“Motion for Surreply”); and (iii) the Defendants’ Motion for Telephonic Appearan...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________
)
ARAYA HENOK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-336 (RWR)
)
CH...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Bruce Campbell, as Administrator for the estate of his son, Gregory C. Campbell (hereinafter “Campbell”), brings this action against defendant police officers and the City of Philadelphia for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The suit arises out of an incident in August of 2006 when Philadelphia Police Officers Frank Luca and William Schlosser shot and killed Campbell.1 Plaintiff initia...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (doc. 9), filed August 6, 2012. Finding that the Plaintiff has standing to bring this suit, the Court nonetheless concludes that the issues raised in the Complaint are not ripe for review. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants’ Motion as follows.
I.
BACKGROUND
In o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On March 23, 2012, Plaintiff commenced this action alleging that Defendants violated his rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991. See Dkt. No. 1. On May 22, 2012, Plaintiff amended his complaint. See Dkt. No. 6.
Currently before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the court is Plaintiff Abe Coffman’s (“Coffman”) Motion to Remand (# 6). Coffman argues that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action because Defendant Dole Fresh Fruit Co. (“Dole”) did not obtain consent from Chevron Products Company (“Chevron”) to remove the case to federal court. Having considered the motion, the submissions of the partie...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction Plaintiff Jim Windwalker (“Mr. Wind-walker”) is proceeding pro se in this lawsuit. Pending before the court is Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. 21) (the “Dismissal Motion”) filed on January 14, 2013. On January 30, 2013, Mr. Windwalker filed his opposition (Doc. 24) to the Dismissal Motion. Defendants followed with their reply (Doc. 25)...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment stating that they can unilaterally modify or terminate medical benefits that they provide to retirees, and they have filed a motion for summary judgment against the sole named defendant who has answered and defended, as well as a motion for default judgment as to the other named defendants. For reasons that will be explained, the Cour...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is an employment discrimination suit. Before the court is defendants Bio-mat USA, Inc. (“Biomat”) and Grifols Biologicals Inc.’s (“Grifols”) Motion to Dismiss (# 91). Plaintiff Chike Okeke has responded (# 13), and Defendants have replied (# 14). Also before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Strike (# 8), to which Okeke has responded (# 12) and Defendants have replied (# 15).
1. Fac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Filing No. 5). Having considered the parties’ briefs, evidence, and arguments heard on February 20, 2013, the Court will grant the Plaintiffs Motion, in part.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff West Plains, L.L.C. d/b/a CT Freight Company (“CT Freight”) asserts seven causes of action: (1) misapprop...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Previously pending before the Court was a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Issue of Insurance Coverage (Rec. Doc. 73) filed by Defendant, NJC Enterprises (“NJC”). Plaintiff Colony Insurance Company (“Colony”), and Counter-Defendants Hartford Fire Insurance Company (“Hartford”) and Nutmeg Insurance Agency, Inc. (“Nutmeg”) (collectively hereinafter “Hartford/Nutmeg” si...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are the following Motions: (1) Motion to Dismiss and for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Tri-Parish Industries, Inc. (“TP Industries”) and Charles L. Augustine (“Augustine”) (R. Doc. 44); (2) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by TP Industries and Augustine (R. Doc. 71); (3) Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Tri-Parish Barge, I...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 87)
I. INTRODUCTION.
Plaintiff Jose Henao sues Defendant Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., asserting employment discrimination. Wyndham moves for summary judgment on all claims asserted in the Third Amended Complaint.
At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment, Henao dismissed the following claims wit...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PACIFIC STOCK’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER DENYING PEARSON EDUCATION’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION.
Plaintiff Pacific Stock, Inc., alleges that Defendant Pearson Education, Inc., has infringed on Pacific Stock’s photograph copyrights. Pacific Stock gave Pearson licenses to use those photographs in textbooks that Pearson said it planned to publish, but...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case involves the unwinding of what has been described as “one of the biggest mergers and most fought-over leveraged buyouts of the 1980’s, a battle that became a symbol of the decade’s excesses” — the 1986 merger of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and Nabisco. Ironically, the merger was “intended to enhance the tobacco company’s increasingly negative image.” 1 Fourteen years later,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Advanced Technology Corporation (“ATC”) developed an innovative technique for measuring the tensile properties of metallic materials, called Automated Ball Indentation (“ABI”). ATC alleges that its competitors — Defendants Instron Inc. (“Instron”), Tinius Olsen International Co. (“Tinius Olsen”), and MTS Systems Corporation (“MTS”) — conspired to maintain th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(Dkt. No. 12)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East (“Union”) has brought this lawsuit to enforce an arbitration award concerning the discharge of Union member Christopher Wheeler by the Defendant North Adams Regional Hospital (“Hospital”). The Union seeks direct enforcement of the arbitration awa...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Bobbie Jean Tenhove applied for social security disability benefits, alleging inability to work due to multiple sclerosis, back problems, and other impairments, but the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) denied her application initially and on reconsideration. Plaintiff requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), but the ALJ also determined t...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, Nordock Inc., (“Nordock”), and the Defendant-Counterclaimant, Systems Inc. (“Systems”), are rivals in the loading dock device industry. Both companies design, manufacture, and sell dock levelers which are mechanical devices used to create a bridge between loading dock surfaces and the surfaces of truck load beds. Both companies are curr...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Lead plaintiffs AXA Private Management, Pacific West Health Medical Center Employees Retirement Trust, Harel Insurance Company Ltd., Martin and Shirley Bach Family Trust, Natalia Hatgis, Securities & Investment Company Bahrain, Dawson Bypass Trust, and St. Stephen’s School (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), brought this class action on behalf of individuals and entities who invest...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES; PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE; PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE
Currently pending before the Court are Plaintiff Kevin Moshir’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Expenses (Doc. 40), Motion to Strike (Doc. 47) Defendant Automobili Lamborghini America LLC’s Amended Response to Plaintiffs Motion for Attorneys’ ...
Views: 0
*216ORDER
Appellants Douglas Rhoads and Shannon Rhoads (“the Rhoadses”) and their attorney Ronald Ryan (collectively “Appellants”) have filed an unopposed “Request for Certification of Direct Appeal to Court of Appeals” of their Chapter 11 Bankruptcy order. Doc. 17-1. Appellants have appealed the final order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona dismissing their adversary compl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment on the *270Pleadings [Doc. 11] and the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 13].
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On October 2, 2007, the Plaintiff applied for disability benefits, and on October 30, 2007, she applied for supplemental security income alleging an onset date of October 1, 2005 and disa...
Views: 0
Page 26132
ENTRY AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT INOPLAST’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. # 12)
This matter arises from a business relationship between Plaintiff Composite Technologies, L.L.C. (“Plaintiff’) and Defendant Inoplast Composites SA DE CV (“Defendant”) under which the Plaintiff manufactured and delivered products in response to orders placed by the Defendant. Am. Compl. ¶ 4-5. The Plaintiff alleges that De...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Defendant Citibank (“Citibank”) filed a notice of removal (the “Notice of Remov*87al”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441(a), 1441(b), and 1446, to remove this action from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County (the “State Court”) (Qader v. Citibank, Index No. 652665/2012) to this Court. Citibank contends that removal of this action is proper because dive...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This copyright dispute concerns the printing of a book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes: Cannabis and the Conspiracy Against Marijuana (the “Work”), written by the now deceased Jack Herer. Plaintiff Mark Herer brings suit on behalf of the author’s estate, alleging Defendants Ah Ha Publishing, LLC, (“Ah Ha”) and Michael Kleinman have produced and distributed and continue to produce ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Background
On October 24, 2011, Plaintiffs, Dean Mostofi and Young Sun Kim, filed a pro se Bill of Complaint in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland, against Defendants, Capital One, N.A. (“Capital One”), and Capital One employees Jon Duckworth and Tina Register. (Doc. No. 2). Plaintiffs assert that Defendants took unlawful action with respect to Plaintiffs’ jo...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL; (2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
On February 25, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on Defendant Continental Automotive’s Motion for Partial Dismissal and Motion for More Definite Statement (doc. # 7). Adam Poncio, Esq., appeared at the hearing on behalf of Plaintiff Larry W. Prewitt, Sr. Santiago A...
Views: 0
Page 26220
RULING
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Albert Woodfox’s (“Woodfox”) petition for habeas relief on the claim that Woodfox’s March 1993 indictment by a West Feliciana Parish grand jury was tainted by grand jury foreperson discrimination. An evidentiary hearing was held on May 29-31, 2012. Both Woodfox and the State have filed post-hearing memoranda. (Docs. 259 and 258 respectively)....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff James M. Nelson (“Plaintiff’) brought this action against Defendants County of Sacramento (“County”), Sacramento County Sherriffs Department (“Sheriffs Department”), Sacramento County Sheriff Scott R. Jones (“Jones”), Murray Boulware (“Boulware”), Sacramento County Sheriffs Deputy Michael Vale (‘Vale”), and Sacramento County Sheriffs Deputy Jeffrey Shelldorf (“Shell...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND/OR PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Before the Court is Plaintiff Aaron Hunger’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary and Permanent Injunction (“Motion”), filed on November 1, 2012. Defendants University of Hawaii (“the University”), Mary Rita Cooke Greenwood, Dee Uwono, and Ryan M. Akami...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The plaintiff, Jacqueline Ellington (“Ellington”), filed this lawsuit on behalf of her child, C.K.S., challenging a final judgment by Defendant Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, in which he determined that C.K.S. is not “disabled” and, therefore, not entitled to child supplemental security income benefits. On May 26, 2009, Ellington filed on behalf ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS OR TRANSFER AND TRANSFERRING CASE TO SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Plaintiff Greg Price worked for Defendant Bottling Group, LLC for twelve years. As part of his employment, Plaintiff was enrolled in a pension plan. The plan contains a disability benefits provision. It also contains a forum selection clause provi...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT TUCKER’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT This is a First Amendment and procedural due process case brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff Prison Legal News (“PLN”) filed its First Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) against Defendants Kenneth S. Tucker, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, (“FDOC”) and two private corporations...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
FREEDOM WATCH, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-314 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WESTERN WOOD PRESERVERS
INSTITUTE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 12-1253 (ESH)
v.
JOHN M. McHUGH, Secretary
of the Army, et al.,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Virginia Housing Development Authority (“VHDA”)(ECF No. 35). Pro se Plaintiff Nicolle Conyers (“Plaintiff’) alleges that VHDA unlawfully discriminated and retaliated against her based on her race and/or sex in violation of Title VII of the CM Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) during her employm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING THE COMMISSIONER I. PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff seeks review of the Commissioner’s final decision denying his application for Social Security disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income benefits (“SSI”). The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). This matter is before...
Views: 0
Proceedings: Order Dismissing Plaintiffs Action Without Prejudice for Failure to Serve All Parties
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On August 5, 2010, Barry Rosen commenced this action under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., against defendants Netsaits, B.V. (“Netsaits”), Jennsights, Inc. (“Jennsights”), and certain fictitious defendants.1
On August 16, 2010, Rosen filed a proof of ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court on a Motion by Defendant LTI Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a USA SPEC (“LTI”) for leave to file an Amended Counterclaim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 [dkt. entry no. 171], Plaintiff Marlowe Patent Holdings LLC (“Plaintiff’) has opposed this Motion. See dkt. entry no. 175.
This matter also comes before the Court on a Motion b...
Views: 0
*513ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendant Proctor and Gamble Manufacturing Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. # 41) filed on June 8, 2012. Plaintiff Charles Reed has filed a response in opposition (D.E. #44), Defendant has filed a reply (D.E. #52), and both parties have filed additional briefs. For the reasons set forth herein, Defen...
Views: 0
Page 26587
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RONDA L. DAVIS, et al.,
and
CYNTHIA DUDLEY, et al.
Civil Actions 10-1564, 10-1718 (RC)
Plaintiffs,
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendan...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KATE CROWLEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-976 (JEB)
JANET A. NAPOLITANO,
Secretary, U.S. Dep't of Homeland
Security,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Ka...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Dale Ihnken was a concert promoter who organized a festival in Frederick County, Maryland, that was to be held Thursday to Sunday, June 18-21, 2009. Shortly after noon on Friday, June 19, however, after the festival had caused reported noise disturbances well into the previous night, county officials ordered the immediate closure and cancellation of the festival, evicting f...
Views: 0
Page 26862
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 8, 2010, this Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order [ECF No. 99] denying the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (“Original Motion”) [ECF No. 21]. See In re: KBR Bum Pit Litig., 736 F.Supp.2d 954 (D.Md.2010). The Defendants have now filed a Renewed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (“Renewed Motion”...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 62] filed by plaintiffs Joelle Riddle, Gary Hausler, Kathleen Curry, the Committee to Elect Kathleen Curry, and the Libertarian Party of Colorado,1 as well as the Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 70] filed by defendants John Hickenlooper, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Colorado, and S...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on plaintiffs’ Motion For Temporary Restraining Order [ECF No. 16], filed on February 19, 2013. The defendants (“the Government”) responded on February 21, 2013, and the plaintiffs filed a reply on February 22, 2013. On February 22, 2013, the American Civil Liberties Union and The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Colorado filed an amicus curiae bri...
Views: 0
ORDER
Randle Cooke and Kendrick Douglas (collectively “plaintiffs”) are detainees in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4248. Each has been designated a “sexually dangerous person” under 18 U.S.C. § 4248 and is committed at the Butner Federal Correctional Complex in Butner, North Carolina. Plaintiffs have health conditions that require them to use wheelchairs for mobilit...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff is a former student at the State University of New York at Buffalo (“Defendant”) who asserts she has a hearing impairment and who withdrew from the university. She alleges that Defendant failed to provide her with reasonable accommodations, and that such failure constituted a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The matter is now befo...
Views: 0
Page 26993
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ AND OCOTILLO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT
On May 25, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Defendants. (Dkt. No. 1.) On August 3, 2012, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint challenging the United States Department of the Interio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO STATE COURT
A January 14, 2013, order states: Defendant Geoff Sherman removed this action from state court. A month later, this court issued an order directing Sherman to show cause why the action should not be remanded for Sherman’s failure to allege, in the notice of removal, *865facts establishing diversity of citizenship. The order set an October 29, 2009...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT-INTERVENOR OCOTILLO’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On May 14, 2012, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Federal Defendants challenging the United States Department of the Interior’s approval of the May 11, 2012 Record of Decision (“ROD”) approving the O...
Views: 0
*814ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Docket No. 56)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Gregory Brod (“Brod”) has filed a class action lawsuit against Defendant Sioux Honey Association Cooperative (“Sioux Honey”) alleging that it violated state law by marketing its “Sue Bee Clover Honey” in California simply as “Honey,” without disclosing the fact that it did not contain pollen. Plaintiff cont...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________________
)
ANDREA PETERSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Getro Milfort (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against defendants Felix Prevete (“Lt. Prevete”) and Christopher Ferrari (“Court Officer Ferrari”) (collectively “Defendants”), court officers of the New York State Unified Court System, arising from an incident where Plaintiff was arrested for disorderly conduct for an alleged violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 240.20. ...
Views: 2
Page 27116
DEFAULT JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
Luis A. Ayala-Colon Sucres., Inc., (hereafter “AYACOL”) has filed a motion requesting entry of judgment by default. The Court has reviewed the Complaint (Docket 1), the Summons (Dockets 3, 6 & 10), Motion for Entry of Default (Docket 8), and after hearing the testimony of Luis A. Ayala-Bennazar, the Court finds that:
This is an action in Admiralty and Maritime jurisd...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for resolution in this consumer lending action is a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (ECF No. 25). The issues are fully briefed and the court now rules pursuant to Local Rule 105.6, no hearing being deemed necessary. For the reasons that follow, Defendant’s motion will be granted.
I. Background
A. Factual Background
The fol...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ISABEL MORENO et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civ. Actio...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
:
VALERIE JOHNSON-PARKS, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : C...
Views: 0
*38
OPINION AND ORDER
Tudor Insurance Company (“Tudor”) brought this action seeking a declaration that it has no' obligation to defend or indemnify Stay Secure Construction Corporation (“Stay Secure”), which is a defendant both in this case and in separate personal injury lawsuits brought in New York State Supreme Court by Patricio Marin and Lukasz Salata. Before the instant action was filed, T...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the “Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) by Defendants Energy Future Holdings Corporation and Luminant Generation Company *677LLC.” Having reviewed the motion, response, reply, and applicable legal authority, the Court finds that the motion is without merit and is DENIED. Also, the Court will grant leave for Plaintiff to...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
HAROLD W. VAN ALLEN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This case is before the court on two motions: a Second Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff, Cahaba Forests, LLC (“Cahaba”) and Third-Party Defendants, Hancock Natural Resource Group, Inc., Hancock Timber Resource Group, Inc., Hancock Forest Management, Inc., and John Hancock Timber Resource Corporation, (collectively “Hancock”) (Doc. # 120...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is a Motion to Compel Arbitration (Doc. 7) filed by Defendant *1265Cintas Corporation (“Cintas”) on January 3, 2013. The court has also considered the arguments made by Plaintiff Marie King (“Ms. King”) in her Response (Doc. 9) and by Cintas in its Reply (Doc. 10). The parties have fully briefed the motion, and thus it is ripe for consideration. For...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before me is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 23], which was filed on January 11, 2013. Plaintiffs filed a timely Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion [ECF No. 28] on January 25, 2013, and Defendants followed by filing their Reply [ECF No. 29] on February 1, 2013. On February 5, 2012,1 heard oral argument from both sides outlining their respective posi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
)
IN RE: NAVY CHAPLAINCY ) Case No. 1:07-mc-269 (GK)
)
_____________________________ )
MEMORA...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This matter is currently before the Court upon the motion [DE # 11] of the Defendants to dismiss, pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, certain claims of the Plaintiff, or in the alternative, for partial summary judgment on these claims pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This motion is ripe for review.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL B...
Views: 0
memorandum; opinion AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 18, 2012, the undersigned United States District Judge heard oral argument on Plaintiff Michael Prezioso’s and Defendant Prudential Insurance Company of America, Inc.’s (“Prudential”) cross-motions for summary judgment [Docket Nos. 26, 31]. Prezioso claims Prudential improperly denied him long-term disability benefits under the Employee Re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Dr. Carol E. Ball, move for an award of attorneys’ fees claiming that they have “prevailing party” status following success on a motion for a preliminary injunction and subsequent conduct by the South Dakota Legislature. Docket 95. Defendants, Governor Dennis Daugaard, Attorney General Marty Jac...
Views: 0
ORDER
Kenneth Webber was terminated by his employer, First Student, Inc., for insubordination after he refused to remove a 3-by-5 foot Confederate flag from his pickup truck while the truck was parked on property of the Jackson County School District. Webber claims First Student’s termination violated his First Amendment rights. He brings this civil rights action against First Student; Jonel Todd...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DIRK D. HAIRE and REGINALD M.
JONES,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-749 (JDB)
SMITH, CURRIE & HANCOCK LLP,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Dirk Haire ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
Jeffrey Mattson sued Aetna Life Insurance Company under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132(a)(1)(B), 1140, challenging Aetna’s decision to terminate his long-term disability benefits. Mattson and Aetna cross-moved for summary judgment. Based on the pleadings; the motions, responses, and reply; the record; and the applicable law, this cour...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Big Dutchman, Inc., has sued Defendant, Midwest Livestock Systems, Inc., alleging that Midwest breached an agreement to indemnify Big Dutchman for claims relating to allegedly rusting brackets on A-frame layer chicken cages. Midwest has now moved for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a), arguing that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a qui tam action where the government declined to intervene. It is be*1340fore the Court on Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 28], Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss Relators’ First Amended Complaint [Doc. 35], and Relators Kathy Isley and Mark Wood’s Motion for Sanctions Under Rule 11 [Doc. 41]. For the reasons set forth below,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This employment discrimination suit arises from the University of Pennsylvania’s decision not to hire the plaintiff, who is African American, for a position in its Positive Psychology Center. The plaintiff, Dr. Daphne Chandler, argues that the University of Pennsylvania (“Penn”) refused to hire her on account of her race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Penn has moved to dismiss Cha...
Views: 0
Page 27499
ORDER
This matter is before the Court for consideration of Plaintiffs October 29, 2012 motion for sanctions (ECF No. 154), Defendant’s memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 158), and Plaintiffs reply memorandum (ECF No. 159). For the reasons that follow, the Court finds the motion well taken.
I. Background
In this Title VII litigation, Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claims ...
Views: 2
ORDER
Larry Kirby brings the instant action pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. The case presents issues regarding Kirby’s entitlement to long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits and to paralysis benefits under a life insurance plan.1 The case is currently before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment (Docs. 30 & 31).2 Having considere...
Views: 1
ORDER
This litigation arises from a dispute about whether Plaintiffs Bee’s Auto, Inc., and Wayne Weatherbee may operate an automobile repair shop and storage facility on a parcel of property owned by the Plaintiffs in Clermont, Florida. The case also involves a separate dispute as to whether the Plaintiffs can post signs on that property complaining about the City of Clermont’s government.
The ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On January 14, 2013, the undersigned United States District Judge heard oral argument on Movants Curtis and Tina Smith’s (“the Smiths”) Motion to Intervene [Docket No. 33] as well as the Smiths’ Motion to Permit Filing of Reply to Opposition to Motion to Intervene [Docket No. 60] (“Motion to Reply”).1 Plaintiff Tim George initiated this putative class ...
Views: 0
Page 27589
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 11-00604 (CKK)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Lloyd Randall Anderson has filed a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunctive Relief (“Motion for Preliminary Injunction”), to which the defendant, TOL, Inc. (“TOL”), filed a Response in opposition (Docket No. 23), and Anderson filed a Reply (Docket No. 34). TOL has filed a Motion to Dismiss or Transfer (Docket No. 16), to which Anderson filed a Respo...
Views: 0
Page 27654
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a “Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue under 12(b)(3) or, Alternatively, Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration” (Rec. Doc. 214), filed by defendants V Manpower Philippines (“V People”) and Pacific Ocean Manning Inc. (“POMI”).
I. BACKGROUND:
The plaintiffs are Filipino workers (including welders and pipe fitters) who allege t...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
On January 7, 2013, Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, approved the state of Maine’s proposal to tighten the eligibility requirements for MaineCare, Maine’s Medicaid program. The Plaintiffs are disabled adults facing reduction or termination of benefits under the tightened eligibility req...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is William G. Schwab’s appeal from Bankruptcy Judge Robert N. Opel, IPs decision overruling his objections to James S. Rockel Jr. and Rebecca A. Rockel’s amended bankruptcy schedules and denying his request for a surcharge. The matter has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition. For the following reasons, the appeal will be denied.
Background
Appellees James S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
The United States has filed an action seeking to challenge the grant of a Special Permit issued by Defendant Town of Lincoln Zoning Board of Appeals (“Board” or “ZBA”) to Defendant NuPath, Inc. (“Nu-Path”) allowing construction of a structure on a property owned by Defendant Town of Lincoln Affordable Housing Trust (“Trust”) located in Lincoln, Massachusetts...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING RESPONDENT’S RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND PETITIONER’S MOTION TO STAY (Dkt. Nos. 26 & 28)
I. INTRODUCTION
On April 25, 2007, Petitioner William Johnson was indicted in state court for home invasion, assault with a dangerous weapon, breaking and entering, threatening to commit a crime, and malicious injury to property. After a jury...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Christopher McAleer brings this action against his former employer alleging age discrimination and failure to pay sales commissions. He has also amended his complaint to bring common law claims for tortious interference with advantageous relations and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Defendant Prudential Insurance Company of America moves to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. Nos. 9 & 23)
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint alleging negligence and malpractice during his bankruptcy proceedings. Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that Plaintiff had failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Dkt. No. 9. This motion was referred to...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
WARREN GLADDEN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 27762
OPINION
This matter is before the court on the Motion for Summary Judgment of Officer Robert Keuch, Officer Jeffrey J. Ingemie, Officer Shannon N. Miller, Officer Claude Simpkins, and The City of Coatesville, *187Pennsylvania filed November 26, 2012.1 On January 3, 2013, Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition to Defendantsf] Motion for Summary Judgment was filed.2
SUMMARY OF DECISION
For the reasons...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter comes before the Court upon several motions filed by the Parties. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”), National Basketball Association (“NBA”), National Football League (“NFL”), National Hockey League (“NHL”), and Office of the Commissioner of Baseball doing business as Major League Baseball (“MLB”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “the Leagues”) filed their Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
David I. Cohen and Elaine Cohen1 (“Appellants”) appeal from a Final Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania finding them liable to Appellee Jeffrey J. Siki-rica (“the Trustee”) in the amount of $488,615.79.2 The Bankruptcy Court held that Mr. Cohen fraudulently transferred the funds by depositing the funds into Appe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
BEFORE THE COURT are the following motions: (1) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (ECF No. 57); Defendants’ Motion to Strike (ECF No. 147); and (3) Defendants’ Motion to Expedite (ECF No. 148). These motions were heard with telephonic argument on February 21, 2013. Lori A. Isley and Andrea J. Schmitt ap...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant Joseph P. MeCloskey-Diaz’s motion requesting strict compliance with the plea agreement and other remedies, pursuant to Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971). (Docket No. 1030.) For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES defendant McCloskey’s motion.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Plea Agreement and Change of Plea Hearing...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Plaintiffs Dale M. Wallis (“Dr. Wallis”), James L. Wallis (“Mr. Wallis”), and Hygieia Biological Laboratories Inc. (“Hygieia”) brought this action against defendants Centennial Insurance Company Inc. (“Centennial”) and Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co., Inc. (“Atlantic Mutual”) arising from plaintiffs’ veterinarian professional liability...
Views: 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PAULA V. WHITING,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-00898 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
LABAT-ANDERSON, INC.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANDREA CANNON, on behalf of herself
and all other similarly situated
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-465 (CKK)
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Plaintiffs Eagle Auto Mall Corp. (“Eagle”), and Terry Chrysler Jeep, Inc. (“Terry”) are automobile dealerships that were terminated in connection with the bankruptcy of Chrysler LLC, and certain of its subsidiaries and affiliates (“Old Chrysler”).1 Defendant Chrysler Group, LLC., (“Chrysler”) is the entity that purchased certain of the assets in the bankru...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________________
)
HENRY L. KLEIN, PRO SE, AND ON )
BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY )
SITUATED, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an appeal from an Order entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois (Bankruptcy Case No. 11-90592). This court has jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). This court has carefully reviewed the arguments of all three parties and the two amici curiae.1 Following this review, this court reverses the Order of the Bankruptcy...
Views: 1
*1007
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Ironshore Indemnity, Inc. and Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company (collectively “Ironshore”) filed suit against Synergy Law Group, LLC and Bartley J. Loethen seeking a declaratory judgment that Ironshore is not required to defend or indemnify Defendants under two insurance policies. In February of 2012, Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that Ir...
Views: 0
Order
Plaintiff Gloria Praschak filed this tort suit in the Circuit Court of Cook County against Defendants Kmart Corporation, Pavement Systems, Inc., and Horizon Retail Construction, Inc. R. 1-1, Def.’s Exh. A,' Am. Compl. Praschak alleges that she suffered injuries while walking on a Kmart parking lot because Defendants negligently performed construction work and blocked off handicapped-accessi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Presently before the Court is Plaintiff, Albert A. Kubiak’s (“Kubiak”), Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against Defendant, Philadelphia Police Officer Stacey Harris (“Officer Harris”). For the reasons stated below, we will deny the Motion. I. BACKGROUND On October 9, 2011, Kubiak filed a Complaint and, on January 24, 2013, an Amended Complaint against Defendants, Philadelphia Poli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
1
Plaintiff ThyssenKrupp Steel USA, LLC (“TKS”)’s motion for summary judgment in its favor on Defendant United Forming, Inc. (“UFI”)’s five-count counterclaim (Doc. 47; see also Docs. 48-50, 52, 70 (UFI’s opposition), and 80 (TKS’s reply in support))2 and UFI’s motion for summary judgment in its favor on Count I of its counterclaim (Doc. 71; see also Docs. 72 and 8...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the Court is a Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award (D.I. 7) filed by Petitioner Paul E. Provost, Jr., a Cross-Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award (D.I. 15) filed by Respondent Intrafusion Holding Corporation, and associated briefing (D.I. 16, 17, 20). For the reasons discussed, the Motion to Vacate is denied, and the Cross-Motion to Confirm is granted.
BACKGRO...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Joint Motion to Seal Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Class Certification, (Doc. 70), and Defendant’s unopposed motion to seal its brief in opposition to the same motion for class certification and certain exhibits. (Doc. 74.) A hearing on the motions was held on Febru*727ary 20, 2013. The Court concludes ...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Linda Butler (“Butler”) brings this action pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”). Butler challenges the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (the “hearing officer”) denying her application for Social Security Disabi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The plaintiff, John J. Morano (“Morano”), brings this putative class action against defendant, BMW of North America, LLC (“BMWNA”), for violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”), breach of contract, breach of warranty, and punitive damages. The dispute arose when the battery in Morano’s new BMW automobile would not hold a charge and his BMW d...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to amend his complaint. R. 17. The changes in his amended complaint are meant to salvage the claims that the Court dismissed on statute of limitations grounds in its earlier Memorandum Opinion and Order. Id. at 1-2; see also R. 11 at 7-11 (dismissing Click’s damages claims for alleged adverse employment actions in 2009 and 201...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
This case involves an Iranian instrumentality that seeks to avoid payment to American victims of Iranian terrorist acts. Specifically, four groups of judgment creditors (“Plaintiffs”) who hold *835judgments against Iran seek to recover assets (“the Blocked Assets”) held by Third Party Plaintiffs Visa and Franklin.1 Those assets are owed to an Iranian instrumentalit...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff-counterclaim defendant J. Taikwok Yung, who purportedly does business under the name Web-adviso (“Plaintiff’),1 brought this action against defendant-counterclaim plaintiff Donald J. Trump (“Defendant”) seeking a declaration that he is entitled to use the internet domain names trumpabudhabi.com, trumpbeijing.com, trumpindia.com and trumpmumbai.com (collectivel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The court has reviewed the pending Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 14) (the “Motion”) filed by Piggly Wiggly Alabama Distribution Company, Inc. (“PWADC”) on July 18, 2012, and the parties’ respective supporting and opposing materials. (Docs. 15-19). In his complaint, Plaintiff James King (“Mr. King”) has asserted two counts: one for race discrimina...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Patricia Cook brings this action against defendant Triple Transport, Inc. (“Triple Transport”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Triple Transport moves for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 11). Ms. Cook has responded (Dkt. No. 17), and Triple Transport has replied (Dkt. No. 21). Triple Transport also moves to strike...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer
[[Image here]]
I. Introduction
Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC (“Helferich” or “Defendant”) is a company that licenses and enforces patents to which it lays claim. It is registered to do business and has an office in Illinois. Its principal place of business is Arizona. It does not manufacture or s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM, ORDER, AND JUDGMENT
Table of Contents
I. Introduction...............................................................51
II. Facts and Procedural History...............................................53
III. Removal Standard.........................................................54
IV. Federal Question Jurisdiction ...............................................54
a. Disputed and Subst...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On January 19, 2012, plaintiffs Dexia SA/NV, Dexia Holdings, Inc., FSA Asset Management LLC, and Dexia Credit Local SA filed this action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, alleging claims of fraud, fraudulent inducement, aiding and abetting fraud, negligent misrepresentation and successor liability under New York common law against defendants, thirteen Be...
Views: 0
Page 28505
*710MEMORANDUM OPINION
Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund has filed this securities case against MetLife, Inc., individual MetLife officers and directors, and Met-Life’s underwriters, purportedly on behalf of “all persons who purchased or acquired MetLife common stock [between February 2, 2010 and October 6, 2011] pursuant or traceable to the Company’s August 3, 2010 publi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs bring this securities fraud action under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.1 They allege that a number of material misstatements and omissions made by defendant Vivendi, S.A. (“Vivendi”) artificially inflated the price of Vivendi American Depositary Shares (“ADS’s”), and that plaintiffs were ha...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
McMahan Jets, LLC (“McMahan”) brings this state law case against Roadlink *1001Transportation, Inc. (“Roadlink”), Rizo Jet Aviation Services, LLC (“Rizo”), and John and Jane Doe, the purported owners of Roadlink. The case arises from the sale of a Cessna Citation Aircraft (the “Aircraft”) by Roadlink to McMahan. McMahan presses five claims: breach of contract, n...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND [Docket No. 11].
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Eileen Dowell (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against Contra Costa County (“Defendant County”) and two Contra Costa County employees, District Attorney Mark Peterson (“Defendant Peterson”) and District Attorney Chief Inspector Paul Mulligan (“Defendant Mulligan”), ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Eun Joo Lee (“Plaintiff’), individually and behalf of all others similarly situated, brought this putative class action against defendants Forster & Garbus LLP (“Forster”) and NCOP XI, LLC (“NCOP” and, collectively with Forster, “Defendants”) asserting claims pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. Defendants moved to...
Views: 0
DECISION & ORDER
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Plaintiff, Ads Plus Advertising, Inc. (“Ads Plus”), has sued defendants Alan Ault, Robert Ault and Professional Auto Retailers, Inc. (“PAR”) (collectively, “defendants”) for breach of contract and unjust enrichment arising out of defendants’ alleged failure to compensate Ads Plus for services rendered by it. (Docket # 1). Ads Plus contends that defendant...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART RULE 17(C) SUBPOENA TO THIRD PARTY KORN/FERRY Defendant David Nosal moves for a subpoena duces tecum under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c). Nosal is charged with conspiracy and theft of trade secrets *406from his former employer, Korn/Ferry International. The issues are (1) whether the documents Nosal seeks to subpoena are material to his defense...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY ACTION
Plaintiffs Elsie Cayanan, Kimberly Baker, and Jesse McKay bring this putative class action for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. §§ 227 et seq. Defendants Citibank, N.A.; Citigroup, Inc.; and CitiFinancial Services, Inc., move to compel arbitration of Plaintiffs’ claims in separat...
Views: 0
*938DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING IN PART AND OVERRULING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. #8); PLAINTIFF GRANTED LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, NAMING THE COMMITTEE ADMINISTERING THE NATIONAL CITY CORPORATION AMENDED AND RESTATED MANAGEMENT SEVERANCE PLAN AS A PARTY DEFENDANT, WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS DECISION AND ENTRY; THE PARTIES...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. BACKGROUND
On November 30, 2012, plaintiff PC Puerto Rico, LLC (PCPR) filed a complaint against defendant Nidal K. El Smaili, John Doe, and ABC Company, Inc. (Docket No. 1.) In the complaint, plaintiff alleges trademark infringement and dilution pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1051, et seq., the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1125, et seq....
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant Medical Card System, Inc.’s (MCS) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”). (Docket No. 14.) Having considered MCS’ motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs’ opposition, (Docket No. 39), and the defendant’s reply, (Docket No. 53), the Court GRANTS defendant MCS’ motion to dismiss for the reasons discussed bel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are a Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 20) and Mo*1212tion to Strike Affidavit (Dkt. 43) filed by Plaintiff Nautilus Insurance Company (“Nautilus”).1 Having considered the record, including the briefs and affidavits of the parties, and having considered the oral arguments heard on January 16, 2013, the Court will grant Nautilus’ Motion for S...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the motion for a hearing filed by plaintiff Union de Periodistas de Artes Gráficas y Ramas Anexas (“UPAGRA”), (Docket No. 9), and defendant Telemundo de Puerto Rico, Inc. (“Telemundo”)’s response, (Docket No. 11.) Also before the Court are defendant Telemundo’s two briefs in support of confirming an arbitration award of June 8, 2012, (Docket Nos. 14 & 24), as...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is a declaratory judgment action brought by Progressive Casualty Insurance Company (“Progressive”) seeking a declaration that the directors and officers/company liability policy issued by Progressive to Omni National Bank (“Omni” or the “Bank”) does not afford coverage for claims asserted against certain named defendants in a related lawsuit filed by the Federal Deposit Insura...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE )
PROVINCE OF MANITOBA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JARROD BECK, KEERTHI REDDY, and
ERIN GALLOWAY,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 04-1391 (JDB)
TEST MASTERS EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
O...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
DOUGLAS SCZYGELSKI, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-2236 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHEWAFERAW SHIBESHI,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-356 (JEB)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se Plaintiff Shewaf...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
FRANCIS A. GILARDI, JR., et al. )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Civil Action No. 13-104(EGS)
v. )
)
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, et al. )
...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
MICHAEL FENWICK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 12-1584
v. ) (EGS-TBG-RMC)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________
)
ROBERT T. BUTLER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0437 (EGS...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KATHRYN LYNN CAMPBELL,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action 12-115 (RC)
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL
GROUP, INC, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
;UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PRATEEK DAVE, .
.
Plaintiff, .
. Civil Action No.: 08-cv-0856 (RC)
...
Views: 0
Page 28725
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CAUSE OF ACTION,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1342 (JEB)
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 2009, in the wake of the rec...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION
CENTER,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-2261 (JDB)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
P...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
BEVERLY A. BAKEIR, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-2202...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GREG MUTTITT,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 10-202 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
DOUGLAS WILLIAM HYSELL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________________
)
SIERRA CLUB, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
Miscellaneous No. 11-512
Petitioner,
GK/DAR
v.
DELO...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MICHAEL BURKE, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 10-1805 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Leide DaCruz-Crossely (“Plaintiff’) brings this suit against U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee for Asset Backed Pass Through Certificates Series 2004-WWF1 (“Defendant”) seeking an injunction against foreclosure and a declaratory judgment that Defendant is not the proper “holder” of her mortgage. Because Plaintiffs claims are barred by claim preclusion, Defenda...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Thomas Parker (“Parker”) brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his conviction for indecent assault and battery in the Massachusetts Superior Court (“Superior Court”), sitting in and for the County of Middlesex. See Pet. Relief Conviction Sentence Person State Custody (“Pet.”) 6, 8, ECF No. 1. Parker presents two ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON GOVERNMENT’S MOTION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P. 12(b)(2) AND 12(d) TO RESOLVE DEFENDANT’S IMMUNITY CLAIM PRIOR TO TRIAL
On December 6, 2012, the court ordered defendant James Bulger to respond to the government’s contention, set out initially in its November 16, 2012 response to defendant’s November 2, 2012 motion for discovery, that his claim of immunity from prosecution...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on a motion to dismiss filed by the defendant, Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (“SPS”), Filing No. 6. This is a purported class action for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”). The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1692k(d), 1331, and 1337.
I. BACKGROUND
In her complaint, the plaintif...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
As the poignant refrain from a popular duet cover laments, here we go again. Ray Charles & Norah Jones, “Here We Go Again,” Genius Loves Company, Concord Records (2004). In July 2012, Plaintiffs John Rock, Tim Steward, and Kody Collins filed this antitrust action against Defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association (the “NCAA”),challenging two ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ motions for summary judgment (Docs. 21 and 23). After careful consideration of the parties’ submissions and for the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Kum & Go, L.C.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 23) and DENIES David Cort’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21).
BACKGROUND
On August 29, 2011, Plaintiff David Cort (“Plaintiff’) filed a petition for ...
Views: 0
UNITED S'I`ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHEILA GENRETTE, )
Parent and next friend of M.S., a minor )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 11-2092 (RJL)
)
OPTIONS PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL )
) F E L E D
Defendant. ) MA.R 0 4 2013
cierx, u_s. umw a Bankruptcy
MEMORANDUM OPINIGN Courts fur the District of Co|umbia
(F@bruary;,jzoiz) [Dkt. ##7, 31
Plaintiff Sheila Generette ("Gen...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: DAMAGES
In this patent case, a jury found that a range of Samsung products infringe several of Apple’s design and utility patents, and that several Samsung products dilute Apple’s trade dress. The jury awarded $1,049,343,540.00 in damages, and provided a breakdown of this award by Samsung product. In their post-trial motions, the parties have raised a number of issues concerning the dam...
Views: 0
Page 29060
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
If tow trucks or tow firms do business in the City and County of San Francisco (“City”), the City requires them to participate in a permit system (“Permit System”). Plaintiff, the California Tow Truck Association (“CTTA”), seeks a declaration *1161that the Permit System is preempted by the Federal Aviation Administratio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff 7-Eleven, Inc. (“7-Eleven”) seeks a permanent injunction against defendant owners and employees of one of its franchises in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 7-Eleven asks the Court to order franchisee-defendants 1 to surrender the store to 7-Eleven and to eject them from the premises.
Presently before the Court is 7-Eleven’s Motion for a Mandatory Preliminary Inj...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
VANESSA E. GATES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1462 (RWR)
)
UNITED ST...
Views: 0
Page 29138
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-895 (JEB)
e-SMART TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Securiti...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court for a nonjury trial on December 17, 2012. The Court now has before it the parties’ post-trial briefs (Dkts. 188, 290) and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (Dkts. 189, 191), as well as the transcripts (Dkt. 184) and exhibits (Dkts. 179, 180,181) from the trial proceedings.
OVERVIEW
On August 11, 2010, Plaintiffs, Michael Citron and Daniell...
Views: 1
ORDER
This Cause is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion To Apply New Jersey Law To Plaintiffs’ Punitive Damages Demand (Dkt. 83) and its Motion to Exclude Plaintiffs’ Expert Suzanne Parisian (Dkt. 117).
Standard
Expert Witness Testimony
The presentation of scientific and technical knowledge or opinion testimony by a “witness qualified as an expert” is permitted under Rule 702 of the Federa...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TADEUSZ LATYNSKI-ROSSITER et al., :
:
Plaintiffs, : Civil Action No.: 11-2286 (RC)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEBRA LEE, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-2083 (RC)
:
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(2)(A), from which this court derives its jurisdiction, see id. § 1415(i)(3)(A), plaintiff Tia Pass challenges the New Hampshire Department of Education’s decision rejecting her claim that the Rollinsford School District failed to provide her younger sister and ward, Haley, with a...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the court on the motion for summary judgment (Doc. 40) and supplemental motion for summary judgment (Doc. 57) filed by the defendants, the Selma City Board of Education (the “Board”) and Joe J. Peterson (“Peterson”) (collectively, the “defendants”). The parties have filed briefs and evidentiary materials in support of their ...
Views: 0
Page 29296
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RONNIE FOOTE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1351 (CKK)
DR. STEPHEN CHU, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Energy,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Page 29330
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT [DOC. # 21]
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Dennis Morris’ Motion for Summary Judgment as to Copyright Infringement, filed October 19, 2012 [Doc. # 21]. The Court conducted a hearing on the Motion on January 11, 2013. Following argument, Defendant Russell Young filed supple...
Views: 0
Page 29492
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
UNITED WESTERN BANK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-0408 (ABJ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #44). The Motion has been fully briefed. (Docs. #45, 48, 52). For the reasons discussed below, the court concludes the Motion is due to be granted.
I. INTRODUCTION
This case concerns a mortgage on Plaintiffs’ home, and whether Plaintiffs had an obligation to continue to pay that mortgage while in p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
On July 3, 2012, plaintiff VoiceAge Corporation (“VoiceAge”) sued defendant RealNetworks, Inc. (“RealNetworks”) for breach of contract in New York State Supreme Court. On July 26, 2012, on the basis of diversity, RealNetworks removed the action to this Court. RealNetworks filed its first Answer on October 9, 2012. (ECF no. 27 (the “Answer”).) Shortly thereafter, purs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Last Atlantis, Lola, Lulu, Good-buddy, Friendly, Speed Trading, Bryan Rule, Brad Martin, and River North filed this action, alleging violations of § 10b of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5 (a), (b) and (c), as well as state law claims, including breach of contract, common law fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, tortuous interference, and violations of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant Alied Pilots Association (“APA”)’s Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 9], Defendant American Airlines, Inc. (“American”)’s Motion to Transfer this Action to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York [ECF No. 13], and Defendant APA’s Motion For Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Defendant Ame...
Views: 0
Page 29790
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are two motions by Defendant Procaccio Painting and Drywall Company, Inc. (hereinafter, “Defendant” or “Procaccio”). The first is Procaccio’s Motion to Dismiss Count I of the Complaint. The second is a Motion for Summary Judgment on Count II of the Complaint and Counts I-IV of Procaccio’s Counterclaim. For the reasons stated herein, the Motion to Di...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jerome Palmieri, the relator, filed this qui tarn action on behalf of the United States of America and various individual states (collectively, the “Qui Tam States”)1 against his employers, Alpharma, Inc. and Alpharma Pharmaceuticals, LLC (collectively, “Alpharma”); King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“King”); and Pfizer, Inc. (“Pfizer”), defendants,2 pursuant to the False Claims Act (...
Views: 0
OPINION
A high school senior claims he was injured while sparring against an Army re*552cruiter during a martial arts demonstration during a school gym class.
However, the contact sports exception to tort liability applies.1
Summary judgment must be entered for the United States.
I.
In October 2007, two U.S. Army recruiters — Staff Sergeants Gary A. Roth and Mark White — were actively looking f...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. See Dkt. No. 18. Upon due consideration, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This action is predicated on Defendant’s alleged retaliatory termination of Plaintiff’s temporary duty assignment. See Dkt. No. 1. The relevant facts are taken principally from the parties’ Statements of Material Facts and res...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On January 9, 2012, Plaintiff Irenn H. Johnson (“Johnson”), appearing pro se, commenced this suit against Orkin, LLC (“Orkin”), Orkin Pest Control (“OPC”), and Orkin Exterminating, Inc., (“OEI”) (collectively, “Defendants”) by filing a complaint with this Court alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Illin...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court are a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Defendant, Dr. James Klein (“Dr. Klein”) (Rec. Doc. 22) and Plaintiffs opposition (Rec. Doc. 27). Dr. Klein’s motion was set for hearing on the briefs on November 21, 2012. Having considered the motion and legal memoranda, the record, and the applicable law, the Court finds that Dr. Klein’s ...
Views: 0
Page 30128
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Everlast World’s Boxing Headquarters Corporation (“Everlast”) brought this action against Ringside, Inc. (“Ringside”), Combat Brands, LLC (“Combat”), and RAL, LLC (“RAL”) (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging that Defendants breached contracts with Everlast; infringed Everlast’s trademarks in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1), 1125(a), (c); and were un...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Shanti Novak brings this action against Defendants Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, Captain Scott Politano, Chief John Hennelly and Sergeant Kristen Brylinski (collectively, “Defendants”). Novak asserts claims of sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and sex discrimination and retaliation under the New York State Human Rights Law...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48). The Court now rules on the Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Ideare Media, LLC, now known as SuperMedia, LLC (hereinafter “Plaintiff’ or “SuperMedia, LLC”) publishes the Verizon Yellow Pages and White Pages telephone directories and Superpages.com. (Plaintiffs Statement of Facts (“Doc. 49”) at ¶ 1 and Defendants’ Re...
Views: 1
ORDER
In this matter, Plaintiffs assert claims of copyright infringement against Defendants. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants infringed copyrights to thirteen musical compositions by the unauthorized public performance of these compositions at Norton’s Country Corner (Norton’s) in Queen Creek, Arizona, on June 10 and 11, 2011. (Doc. 29.) Plaintiffs have filed a motion for summary judgment and a ...
Views: 0
*501RULING RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO TRANSFER OR DISMISS (DOC. NO. 25)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Jonathan Tross and Theresa Tross (collectively, the “Trosses”) commenced this action against defendants Ritz Carlton Hotel Company, LLC (“RCHC”), Marriott International, Inc. (“Marriott”), and Ritz Carlton Virgin Islands (“RCVI”) (collectively, the “defendants”). The A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint (ECF No. 39) and brief in support (ECF No. 40) filed by defendants Kathleen Se*411belius, Hilda Solis, Timothy Geithner, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), the United States Department of Labor, and the United States Department of the Treasury (collectiv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS
In their Amended Complaint Plaintiffs Larson Manufacturing Company of South Dakota, Inc., Larson Manufacturing of Iowa, Inc., and Larson Manufacturing Company, Inc. (“Larson”) allege breach of a purchase agreement, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, breach of implied warranty for fitness for a particular pu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
J. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...................................853
A. Factual Background.................................................853
1. The parties and principal actors...................................853
2. Deborahs consumption of microwave popcorn.......................854
3. Activitie...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendant Crawford County School District’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 30], Plaintiff Iwanda Dickey contends Defendant unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of her race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”). After fully considering the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF DISPUTED PATENT CLAIM TERMS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................629
A. Procedural Background 629
1. Serverside’s Delaware action .....................................629
2. Procedural landmarks in the Iowa action..........................630
B. Factual Background 631
1. The patents-in-suit....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This cause is before the court on a Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 17), filed by Consumers Insurance USA, Inc. on January 9, 2013.
The Plaintiff, Gary Smitherman (“Smitherman”), filed a Complaint in this court on February 28, 2012. He brings claims for breach of contract (Count I) and bad faith refusal to pay a claim (Count II).
Smitherman is a ci...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff has responded, defendant has replied, and the matter is ripe for ruling. For the reasons discussed below, the Court declines to exercise jurisdiction and this matter is dismissed.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed this action seeking a declaratory judg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 12(b)(6)”). Having carefully considered the parties’ pleadings, this matter is now ripe for disposition. For the reasons set out below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
I. FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On or about September 23, 2009,...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO LIFT INJUNCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction............................................................418
II. Findings of Fact ........................................................419
A. Women’s Golf........................................................420
B. Women’s Acrobatics and Tumbling (Formerly Competitive Cheer)..........420
C. Women’s Rugby .....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Deborah Young (“plaintiff’ or “Ms. Young”), individually and as the parent *374and guardian of Melissa Young, Emmalee Young, and Cecelia Young, brought this action against Suffolk County, Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Suffolk County Police Department, Michael Delgado (“Delgado”) (collectively, “County defendants”), Edmund Coppa, Edmund J. Coppa Photography, Ne...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The plaintiffs in this products liability Multi-District Litigation (MDL) allege that the antidepressants Celexa and Lexapro cause people to commit suicide. Defendant Forest makes, markets and sells these drugs. Out of the twelve cases remaining in this MDL, all but one involve adult decedents.1 This matter is before me on Forest’s motion to exclude plaintiffs’ general caus...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 26. Oral argument was held on January 16, 2013, in Richland, Washington. The Court has reviewed the motion, the memoranda in support and opposition, the parties’ statements of facts, the declarations, the affidavits, all other relevant filings, an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action arises from the purchase by plaintiff FSA Asset Management LLC (“FSAM”) of over $1.6 billion in certificates issued in 51 residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) offerings in 2006 and 2007. Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 2, 13. According to the allegations in the Amended Complaint, FSAM assigned and transferred the RMBS certificates, including all “right, title and interest” in th...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC # 25) IN ITS ENTIRETY; GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 406(B) (DOC. # 24)
The Court has reviewed the February 8, 2013 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. #25), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING-IN-PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES [DOC. 30]
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs motion to strike affirmative defenses from the answer filed on behalf of Defendants Police Chief William Lansdowne, former police officer Kevin Friedman (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”), and the City of San Diego. Defendants oppose.
The Court dec...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 242], filed by the defendant, Utility Trailer Manufacturing Company (“UTM”). The plaintiff, Monique Beane, timely filed a response [Doc. 286], and UTM then filed a reply [Doc. 302]. As the motion is fully briefed, the undersigned finds that it is ripe for consideration. For the foregoing reasons, UTM’s Motion for Summary ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Introduction In this copyright infringement action involving stock photography, defendant *964moves for summary judgment. For the reasons explained below, defendant’s motion is Granted. Statement Plaintiff Minden Pictures, Inc., is a stock photography agency that licenses photographs to publishers. Defendant Pearson Education, Inc., is a publi...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
By Motion filed on July 16, 2012, defendants New York City Department of Education, City of New York, and Keith T. Matone moved for summary judgment against plaintiff Beatriz Carabello. (Doc. Nos. 49-53.) By Order entered on August 16, 2012, this Court referred that motion to the assigned Magistrate Judge, the Honorable Joan M. Azrack, for a Report and R...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On October 13, 2010, plaintiff Kyle Habecker (“plaintiff’), removed this negligence action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(d) and 1446(d), against defendant KFC U.S. Properties, Inc. (“defendant”), from New York Supreme Court, Queens County, where it had originally been commenced on August 3, 2010. (ECF No. 1, Notice of Removal filed 10/13/10.) On March 3...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Yolanda Jordan (“plaintiff’) brings this action against defendant Forfeiture Support Associates (“FSA” or “defendant”) pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., alleging employment discrimination on the basis of her disab...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Robert Graham brought the above-captioned action against the City of New York and John and Jane Doe 1 through 10. Plaintiff amended the Complaint twice and as part of the amendments, added Defendants William Glenn and Andrew Ugbomah. The Second Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) asserts claims for deprivation of rights, excessive force, false arrest, malicious abus...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs Katie Szpyrka (“Szpyrka”) and Khalilah Wright (“Wright”), collectively “Plaintiffs,” bring this putative class action against Defendant Linkedln- Corporation (“Defendant” or “Linkedln”). Presently before the Court is Linkedln’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION This is an uninsured-motorist insurance case. It arose from an accident between a car driver, Jack Terry, and an uninsured motorist. Jack Terry and his wife, Eden, were on the interstate when the car in front of theirs had a blowout. The driver lost control and hit the Terrys’ vehicle. The Terrys were insured by Safeco Insurance Company of America. The other driver did not h...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Edith Ihegword, brings this action against defendant, Harris County Hospital District d/b/a Ben Taub General Hospital d/b/a Lyndon Baines Johnson General Hospital d/b/a Quentin Mease Community Hospital d/b/a Various Community Health Centers (“HCHD”), for (1) national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title V...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this employment discrimination action filed by Kelly Seale and David Seale (“Plaintiffs”) against the above-captioned government entity1 and five named individuals (“Defendants”), is Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(c) and/or to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint for lack of subject matter juris...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by Rick Trombley (“Plaintiff’), on behalf of himself and his minor children H and N, against John O’Neill, Jeffery Letson, Kim Marie and Michael Gallant (“Defendants”), is Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 1...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 06-363-01
) (RWR)
JOSEPH SOOMAI, )
)
...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the Court is the Motion of the United States of America (hereinafter “United States” or “the Government”) to disqualify Defendant Adam Lacerda’s counsel of record, Marc Neff, Esq. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that Mr. Neff faces, or is likely to face, significant conflicts of interest. The Court further finds that, based on the record before it, thes...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ELECTRONIC PRIVACY )
INFORMATION CENTER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA, N.V.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-241 (CKK)
TERESA STANEK REA, Acting Under
Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Acting Director of the United
States Patent and Trademark Of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MILLEPEDE MARKETING LIMITED,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-cv-00672 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
ANDREW J. HARSLEY,
and
RAPSTRAP LIMITED,
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ELECTRONIC PRIVACY )
INFORMATION CENTER, )
)
Plaintiff, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LINDSAY JENKINS,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-00896 (CKK)
v.
Misc. Action No. 12-00665 (CKK)
JOHN KERRY, et ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff brings this action asserting claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and the Family Medical Leave Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2611 et seq. He contends that his former employer, Amsted Rail Company, Inc., violated his rights under the ADA and FMLA when it (1) “threatened” him with transfer to another position; and (2) terminated hi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court is a Motion in Limine to Exclude the Testimony of John Tomassoni [Doe. 320], filed by the defendant, Utility Trailer Manufacturing Company (“UTM”). The plaintiff, Monique Beane, timely filed a response [Doc. 354], and UTM filed a reply [Doc. 371], For the foregoing reasons, UTM’s motion is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
In this lawsuit, the plaintiff, Monique Beane, claim...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Edward L. Terry’s (“Terry”) Motion to Stay Proceedings (“Motion”). For the reasons that follow, the Court will not stay the action in its entirety at this juncture.
BACKGROUND
On January 5, 2012, Plaintiff CresCom Bank (“CresCom”) sued Defendant CCT Reserve, LLC (“CCT”) to recover on four separate loans secured by promissory notes and mortg...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CONTEMPT
In this collective action, Plaintiffs Lisa Stransky, Natalie Fiore, Erin Perez, Helen
*1103Geist, Angela Vanlengen, Brooke Thompson, Mildred Hamilton, and Nicole Wagner (“Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, bring claims against Defendant HealthONE of Denver, I...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff James Schnitter brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the *472City of Rochester, New York (“City”), Rochester Police Department (“RPD”) Investigator Albert Iacutone, RPD Sergeant Anthony DeBellis (collectively “City defendants”), Monroe County, former Monroe County District Attorney (“DA”) Michael Green, and Assistant District Attorney (“ADA”) Grace Card...
Views: 0
Page 31626
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., LTD (“SEC”), Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“SEA”), and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC’s (“STA”) (collectively “Defendants”) Motion to Transfer Venue to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and alternative request for limited discovery...
Views: 4
*464ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS I. INTRODUCTION In this putative class action, plaintiffs contend that SimplexGrinnell violates California labor laws by effectively requiring its “Field Technicians” to drive company-supplied vehicles to and from work, but then declining to compensate them for the time they spend driving those vehicles at the beginning and end of the work day. Plaintiffs...
Views: 0
Page 31645
ORDER
I. BACKGROUND
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Entry of Injunction, and Entry of Judgment, filed April 27, 2012 [ECF No. 162], and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, To Vacate August 31, 2011 Order [ECF No. 164], The motions have been fully briefed by the parties and the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) ha...
Views: 1
Page 31665
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs filed suit damages seeking damages for injuries allegedly caused by a motor vehicle collision which occurred on June 9, 2009. The Mississippi National Guard (MSNG) seeks dismissal pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment [5]. The Department of Defense also seeks dismissal under the Federal Tort Claims Act [10]. Plaintiffs failed to respond to either motion. Because the MSN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Presently before the Court are the following motions: (1) defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 50(b) or, in the alternative, for a new trial under Rule 59; and (2) plaintiffs motion for reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and interest pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). For the reasons stated below, defendants’ mo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Robert S. Goldberg, M.D.1 and June Beeeham2 (collectively, “Relators”) bring this qui tam action under the provisions of the False Claims Act (“FCA” or “the Act”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., and the *811Illinois Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act (“IWRPA”)3, 740 Ill. Comp. Stat. 175/1 et seq., in the name of the United States of America and the State of Illinois...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff David Sussman (“Suss-man”) commenced this action against Defendant I.C. System, Inc. (“Defendant” or “I.C.”) alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA” or the “Act”) and Section 399-p of the New York General Business Law (“GBL”). Doc. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶¶ 39-48. Before the Court is I.C.’s Motion to Dismiss the Complai...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on “Defendants OneWest, MERS, and Northwest Trustee Services, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment and to Dissolve Injunction” (Dkt. # 172), “Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment” (Dkt. # 176), and defendants’ “Motion to Supplement Record in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment” (Dkt. # 204). Havin...
Views: 1
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) (Doc. No. 19) filed by Defendant Sumner County Emergency Medical Services (“SCEMS”). For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the Motion in part and DENIES it in part.
I. Background
A. Factual Background1
Plaintiff Kimberly Mocic worked as an EMT for SCEMS from January 2007 to *793November 2010, when SCEMS termi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion for attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Defendant Matthew Peters and intervenor State of Missouri have filed responses in opposition to the motion and the issues are fully briefed.
I. Background
Plaintiff Frank L. Snider, III, slashed a United States flag in front of his home in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, and wa...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Wanda Maldonado-Gonzalez (“Plaintiff’) brings the instant sex discrimination suit against her former employer, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Police Department (“PRPD”); the PRPD Superintendent, Emilio Diaz-Colon (“Diaz-Colon”); the former PRPD Superintendent, Jose Figueroa-Sancha (“Figueroa-Sancha”); *4the Director of the Criminal Investigation Division...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on three Motions for Summary Judgment. For the *1314reasons that follow, the Motions are granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
In March 2009, Nick Christie drove from his home in Ohio to visit his brother in the Ft. Myers area. During his trip to Florida, he called his wife and she became concerned about his mental health. After he arr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Before the court are renewed motions for summary judgment or partial summary judgment by all defendants except the Suffolk County defendants,1 and a motion by *569TASER International to strike some of the plaintiffs’ exhibits2. The plaintiffs oppose all motions. The parties have consented to my jurisdiction for all purposes. The motions are decided as follows:
1. ) TASER’s moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Anita and Sheldon Drobny filed a pro se complaint arising out of two lawsuits that JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA *841(“Chase”) filed in Lake County, Illinois, to foreclose the mortgage on their home. Plaintiffs contend that Chase’s two foreclosure lawsuits were improperly filed because Chase failed to obtain a mortgage assignment from Washington Mutual Bank and ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this civil action filed pro se by William R. Praileau *386(“Plaintiff’) against the six above-captioned state and municipal employees and entities (“Defendants”), are (1) United States Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece’s Report-Recommendation recommending that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed, (2) Plaintiffs Objections to the Repor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In this amended civil rights complaint (Dkt. No. 64), plaintiff Robert Mothersell (“plaintiff’ or “Mothersell”) alleges Fourth Amendment and other violations arising from a strip search during the execution of a premises search warrant containing an “all-persons-present” clause. New York’s Court of Appeals reversed Mothersell’s conviction for possession ...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this prisoner civil rights action filed by Jonathan Henry (“Plaintiff’) against the three above-captioned employees of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“Defendants”), is Plaintiffs motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 50(b), or for a new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiff Nick Kovach claims in his 313 paragraph Third Amended Complaint that his labor union, and certain of its representatives, forced him to quit his job with Turner Dairy Farms, Inc., and placed him at the risk of serious bodily harm when a co-worker/Union steward threatened to beat him up and repeatedly tried to run him over with a truck all in retaliation for Plaintiffs actions ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LENA HARDAWAY et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0735 (BAH)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RONNIE NELSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 32124
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PATRICIA L. BELL and
JACQUELINE D. BURTON,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 09-cv-843 (RLW)
v.
MICHAEL B. DONLEY,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
DEBRA CLARK GORDON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09–1262...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court are plaintiff Susan Brown-Thill’s Application to Confirm Arbitration Award (Doc. # 1), plaintiff Susan Brown-Thill’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Her Application for Confirmation of the December 12, 2011 Arbitration Award and Order (Doc. #23), defendant Richard Brown’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment Vacating Arbitration Award (Doc. # 38), defendant Brown’s Motion for...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiffs Southeast X-Ray, Inc. (“SXR”) and Real Radiology, LLC’s (“Real Radiology”) Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 5) and Brief in Support (Doc. 6). The parties appeared before the Court on February 26, 2013 and on March 1, 2013 for a hearing on the Motion. In advance of the hearing, Plaintiffs submitted a Pre-hearing Memorandum (Doc....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The court has before it the July 23, 2012 Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 52) filed by Defendants Johnny Kynard Logging, Inc. (“Kynard Logging”), Double K Logging, LLC (“Double K Logging”), Wiggins Trucking, LLC (“Wiggins Trucking”), and John W. Kynard, III (“Kynard”) (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendants”). The Motion (Doc. # 52) has been fully briefed (Do...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Breanna Sadler and her parents Michelle and Brian Sadler (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action to recover for injuries Breanna incurred as a result of the malfunctioning of her cochlear implant against Advanced Bionics, the manufacturer of the device. Advanced Bionics now moves for summary judgment of most of Plaintiffs’ claims on preemption grounds. Many dis...
Views: 0
Page 32229
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the following motions:
(1) Defendant Eric Howell’s motion for summary judgment, (DN 340), to which Plaintiffs have responded, (DN 376), and the Davis/Howell Defendants 1 have collectively replied, (DN 433).
*696(2) Defendants Ron and Heather Davis’s motion for summary judgment, (DN 343), to which Plaintiffs have responded, (DN 378)...
Views: 0
Page 32231
*685MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the following motions to exclude the opinions and testimony of the several experts identified in this case:
(1) The Tosh Defendants1 and Howell and Davis Defendants’2 respective motions to exclude Plaintiffs’ expert property appraiser Mary Clay, (Docket Nos. 357 & 351, respectively), to which Plaintiffs have responded, (Docket ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 149) filed by Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company (“UP”), and the Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Beemac Trucking, LLC (“Bee-mac”) (Filing No. 147), and Defendants Landstar Ranger, Inc. (“Landstar”), and Edward Samuel Edling (“Edling”) (Filing No. 144). For the reasons discusse...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Viracon, Inc. (“Viracon”) is a Minnesota-based fabricator of architectural glass. In early 2009, a New York-based *880company, Defendant J & L Curtain Wall LLC (“J & L”), agreed to purchase over $1 million worth of Insulated Glass Units (“IGUs”)1 from Viracon for use in the construction of a hotel in upstate New York.2 When J & L failed to pay f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
In the instant case, plaintiff Jason Davenport (“Davenport”) alleges that his former employer, defendant Natgun Corporation (“Natgun”), terminated him on the basis of several objectionable reasons. Defendant now moves to dismiss.
I. Background
Plaintiff Davenport worked as a Laborer at defendant Natgun, which designs water storage tanks for municipalities. He suffered a broken ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (the “Recommendation”) [Docket No. 30] filed on August 3, 2012.
I. BACKGROUND
The undisputed facts are as follows. On June 26, 2006, plaintiffs Michelle and Richard L. Garrett refinanced their home mortgage loan with defendant BNC Mortgage, Inc. (“BNC”). Docket No. 1 at 5, ¶¶ 12-13; Docket No. 22 at 2. I...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
This is a patent infringement action involving a class of antibodies developed to treat certain auto-immune diseases. Plaintiffs AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co., KG; AbbVie Bioresearch Center, Inc.; and AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd. (collectively “Abbott”) and defendants Janssen Bio-tech, Inc. and Centocor Biologies, Inc. (collectively “C...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(Dkt. Nos. 51 & 54)
I. INTRODUCTION
In this case, Plaintiffs Michael Hoot-stein, Kathlyn Stein, and their minor grandchild, M.R. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), filed suit against a number of current and former employees of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (“DCF”),1 alleging, inter alia, that Defe...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the government’s request for restitution in an amount in excess of $40,000.00, for fees and expenses awarded in judgment of the bankruptcy court to a bankruptcy trustee, and loss of income associated with the trustee’s testimony at defendant’s sentencing hearing at New Bern. For reasons stated, the request for restitution is allowed in the amount of $3,000....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The Government moves to compel compliance with grand jury subpoenas seeking foreign bank account information from five taxpayers. Each of those individuals resists compliance, asserting the act of production privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. The Government counters that the Required Records doctrine applies and negates the act of production privi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
In this long-running qui tarn action, plaintiff-relator Associates Against Outlier Fraud alleges that defendants Huron Consulting Group, Inc., Huron Consulting Group, LLC, and Huron Consulting Services, LLC (collectively, “Huron”), and defendants Empire Health Choice Assurance, Inc., and Empire Medicare Services (collectively, “Empire”) violated the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
A bedrock principle of our nation’s naturalization laws has been to accord U.S. citizenship upon the children of naturalized citizens. While the prerequisites and bases for so doing have shifted over time, our society and culture — as developed by, of course, the immigrants who make up the fabric of this nation — value keeping families united in the course of welcoming new ...
Views: 0
*661MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Mary Hollman, as the Administrator of the Estate of Samuel A. Cox, and the Estate of Samuel A. Cox (collectively, “plaintiff’) brings this action against TASER International Incorporated (“TASER” or “defendant”), alleging that an Electronic Control Device (“ECD”) manufactured by TASER was a contributing factor in the death of Samuel A. Cox (“Cox”). Specifically,...
Views: 0
Page 32539
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON COMBINED APPEAL
This matter is before the Court on Standard Industries, Inc. (“Standard”), ABM, Inc. (“ABM”), Fidelity Funding Company (“Fidelity Funding”), Security Funding, Inc. (“Security Funding”), and World Enterprises’s (‘World”) (collectively referred to as “Appellants”) Appeal from Bankruptcy Adversary Proceeding No. 09-2047 in Bankruptcy Case No. 08-20105...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is currently before the Court on Defendant Scott C. Harvard’s (“Harvard”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. After examining the Complaint, Harvard’s motion to dismiss and the associated memoranda, the Court finds that the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented and oral argum...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS This matter comes before the Court on the Defendants Board of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery, Washington State Department of Health and State of Washington’s Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. 10. The Court has considered the pleadings filed regarding the motion and the remaining record. Plaintiff, a licensed physician, brings this case seeking injunctive relief and a declaration...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOCS. 45 & 46)
I. INTRODUCTION
This case concerns approval by the United States Department of the Interior and its member agency the United States Bureau of Reclamation (collectively, “Federal Defendants,” “Reclamation,” or the “Bureau”) of eight (8) interim renewal contracts (“Interim Contracts”) which authorize delivery of water from federal ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND; DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
I.INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Eugene Perez and Herenia Perez (“Mrs. Perez”) (“Plaintiffs”) allege four causes of action against Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) and First American Loanstar Trustee Services LLC (“Loanstar”) (“Defendants”) arising out of the events surrounding the foreclosure sale of Pl...
Views: 0
JUDGMENT
This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge C. Michael Hill for Report and Recommendation. After an independent review of the record, including the objections filed herein, this Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct and adopts the findings and conclusions therein as its own. Accordingly,
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Mot...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
On May 18, 2011, Mark Hiedeman,1 the Bannock County, Idaho prosecuting attorney, filed a felony criminal complaint against Jennie Linn McCormack. The complaint charged McCormack with “the public offense of Unlawful Abortion, Idaho Code § 18-606,” which makes it a felony for any woman to undergo an abortion in a manner not authorized by statute. As a resu...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Rochell Mitchell and Audrey Veasley, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, brought this action against Defendants JCG Industries, Inc. (“JCG”) and Koch Meat Co., Inc. (“Koch”), as a putative class action for violation of the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“IMWL”),1 820 111. Comp. Stat. 105/1 *829et seq. (Count I), and, individually, for v...
Views: 0
Page 32737
OPINION
Crown Coal & Coke Company (“Crown”) commenced this action against Powhatan Mid-Vol Coal Sales, LLC (“Powhatan”) seeking redress for: (1) breach of contract, (2) unjust enrichment, (3) promissory estoppel and (4) an accounting. Powhatan answered and counterclaimed for (1) breach of contract, (2) unjust enrichment and (3) fraudulent misrepresentation. Presently before this court is Crown’...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Complaint in this case was filed on December 2, 2008, but its origins date to the early 1980s.
The bench trial in this case took nine days, heard from twelve witnesses, and the record amounts to thousands of pages.
Judgment for the United States.
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action for foreclosure of federal tax liens, wherein the Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1340 a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
This was a hard contested, but well contested, Lanham Act suit between two competitors in the urine drug testing (“UDT”) industry, Millennium Laboratories, Inc. (“Millennium”) and Ameritox, Ltd. (“Ameritox”). Each accused the other of false advertising. Midway through trial, after the Court had decided a number of claims, the parties, with the assistance of a United S...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The question in this case is whether defendant Lands’ End Inc. fired plaintiff Joseph Hudson IV from his job as general merchandising manager of the Men’s Division because of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. 29 U.S.C. § 623. Defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment under Fed. R.Civ.P. 56, in which it contends that no reasonable jury cou...
Views: 0
*572
Memorandum Opinion
The Plaintiff Sarah C. Yarney (“Plaintiff’), pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, seeks summary judgment as to liability on all claims asserted in her complaint. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Wells Fargo Bank N.A., as Trustee for SABR 2008-1 Trust (“Wells Fargo”), and its loan servicer, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LCC (“Ocwen”), attempted to collect on her home mortgage loan after...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32805: Hartman v. Retailers & Manufacturers Distribution Marking Service, Inc.
Page 32805
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on the defendants’ motions to dismiss. For the reasons explained below, the court will deny in part and grant in part the motions filed by Cosmetic Essence, Inc. and Retailers & Manufacturers Distribution Marking Service, Inc., and will grant SunStates Security LLC’s motion in its entirety.
I. Factual Background
This civil suit arises from a viol...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This bankruptcy appeal stems from a $65 million Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Wesley Snyder through his then-existing company, Image Masters, Inc. (“Image Masters”). After the collapse of that scheme, Lynn E. Feldman, the Chapter 7 Trustee for the bankruptcy estates of Image Masters and related entities (collectively, “Debtors”), commenced two adversary proceedings in the Unite...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Frank Cridland (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action for employment discrimination, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C.A. § 621 et seq., and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”), 43 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 951 et seq., against his employer, Kmart Corporation (“Kmart” or “Defendant”). Presently ...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Maria Porch-Clark and Mary L. Corner filed this suit against Jackie Engelhart, Dave Baskin, and Linda Retel in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois. Doc. 1-1. After removing the case to federal court, Doc. 1, Defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), Doc. 7. Plaintiffs opposed dismissal and moved to remand the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS (DKT. 16)
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Larry Phillips was indicted on a charge of felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Indictment (Dkt. 10). Defendant filed a motion and brief to suppress evidence, including the firearms that are the basis of the current indictment. (Dkts. 16, 17.) The Government filed a ...
Views: 0
*162MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Presently before the Court are plaintiffs’ motions to exclude the opinions and testimony of defendants’ experts (Dkt. Nos. 33, 35 and 36) and defendants’ motion to exclude the opinions and testimony of plaintiffs’ expert and for summary judgment and dismissal of plaintiffs’ design defect, failure to warn and negligence causes of action (Dkt. No. 34)....
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs here purchased taxable gaming revenue bonds and seek to either enforce payment of the bonds or to obtain other legal and equitable relief from defendants — the tribal corporation that issued the bonds, an intermediary brokerage firm that sold the bonds, and the law firm that opined on the legality of the bonds at the time of the sale. While the issuing tribal corporat...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
WALDIMIR ADALBERTO CRUZ )
ROMERO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1799 (RWR)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NASSER ALMUTAIRI,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-1479 (JEB)
INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTING
BUREAU, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Nasser Almutairi bri...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
VAUNIA MORRISON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-2329 (JDB)
KAREN G. MILLS, Administrator, U.S.
Small Business Administration
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Vau...
Views: 1
Page 32945
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAWRENCE GLASER,
Petitioner,
Civil Action No. 12-805 (CKK)
v.
JONATHAN RUSSELL LEGG, et al.,
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(March...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Jeff Benton Homes, Inc. (“Jeff Benton”) filed this case on April 22, 2011, asserting claims of copyright infringement under the federal Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. (the “Copyright Act”), against defendants Alabama Heritage Homes, Inc. (“Alabama Heritage”), and Stoneridge Homes, Inc. (“Stoneridge”). Plaintiffs claims arise out of defendants...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Report And Recommendation (DE 76) filed herein by United States Magistrate Judge William Matthewman. No Objections have been filed to said Report. The Court has ’conducted a de novo review of the entire record herein and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
On December 3, 2012, the Court held an evidentiary hearing on Defendant Stewart’s Mot...
Views: 0
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants’ and Barry A. Cohen, P.A.’s Objection to Magistrate’s Order on Plaintiffs Motion for Disgorgement of Payments Made by Defendants to Cohen & Foster (Dkt. 93) and TemPay, Inc.’s Motion to Enforce Magistrate Judge’s Order (Dkt. 100). Defendants and Barry A. Cohen, P.A. (the “Law Firm”)1 challenge the Magistrate Judge’s Order directing the Law Firm to deposit $...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss certain claims made by Plaintiffs. (Doc. 47). Plaintiffs filed a Response (Doc. 52), and Defendant filed a Reply (Doc. 56). The Court rules on the Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
From November 5, 2009 to November 8, 2009, Filbert Kinlichee (“Mr. Kinlichee”) went several times to the Emergency Department (“ED”) at Chinle Comprehensive Health Ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Begashaw Ayele (“Appellant” or “Ay-ele”) appeals a decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts in which that Court, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8), declined to discharge his student loan obligations to Educational Credit Management Corporation (“Appellee” or “ECMC”), totaling $30,605.83. Ayele argues that the Bankruptcy Court erred when i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
In an action brought under the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”), plaintiff Airton Margalhaes (“Margalhaes”) seeks review of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) revocation of an 1-140 Petition for Alien Worker (“1-140”).
I. Statutory Framework
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act an alien seeking admission to the United States based on an o...
Views: 0
Page 33244
ORDER
Before the Court are the following motions: 1) Teresa Wagner’s (“Plaintiff’) Objection 1 to Entry of Judgment on Count I (“Pl.’s Objection”) (Clerk’s No. 126), filed October 25, 2012; 2) Carolyn Jones’ and Gail Agrawal’s (“Defendants”) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) (“Defs.’ Mot. for JAML”) (Clerk’s No. 130), filed November 1, 2012; 3) Defendants’ Moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND VERDICT OF THE COURT
This case was tried to the Court over an eight-day period on December 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, and 15, 2011.1 As required by Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law thereon.2
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................722
II. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The present insurance coverage dispute is now before the Court by way of Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment. The parties have fully briefed the issues, and provided a comprehensive statement of undisputed facts. (See Defs.’ Ans. to SMF, ECF Dkt. 30.) The matter is now ripe for disposition.
THE PARTIES’ STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS
Plaintiff Illinois Union Insurance Com...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Gregg Lerman (12 Misc. 50), Robert DePalo (12 Misc. 51), and Rosemarie De-Palo (12 Mise. 52) (collectively “the Movants”), seek an order preventing the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“the SEC” or “the Commission”) from obtaining access to their financial records from Citibank, N.A., (“Citibank” or “the Bank”) and quashing the Commission’s administrative subp...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT FDIC’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the Court on a motion to dismiss brought by Defendant Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for the Bank of Whitman. ECF No. 40. The Court heard oral argument on the motion. Maris Baltins appeared for the plaintiff, Dr. Charles C. Sung. David Gardner appeared on behalf of the FDIC. The Court has conside...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
Allstate Insurance Company, Allstate Indemnity Company, and Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Company (“Allstate” or “the Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against several individuals and entities that are alleged to have perpetuated an ongoing scheme to bill the Plaintiffs under New York State No-Fault Insurance Laws for medical services rendered to patient...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This lawsuit began when Ashot Egiazaryan sued Peter Zalmayev for defamation and injurious falsehood. In a counterclaim, Zalmayev alleged that the suit was a “strategic lawsuit against public participation” in violation of N.Y. Civ. Rights Law §§ 70-a, 76-a (the “anti-SLAPP” statute), and also asserted a defamation claim. Following rulings on the parties’ motions to dismiss, th...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER
Kathleen Marin is a former employee of Xerox and a participant in the Xerox Corporation Long-Term Disability Income Plan (“LTD Plan”). The LTD plan is an “employee welfare benefit plan” under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Plaintiffs last day at work for Xerox was in 1977. She stopped working due to a degenerat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
The court heard oral argument on Defendant Career Step’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Dkt. No. 174] on February 5, 2013 and took the parties’ positions as argued during the hearing under advisement. The court has also carefully reviewed the parties’ submission...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are the following motions; defendant, Mitek Systems, Inc.’s (“Mitek”) Motion Requiring Pre-discovery Identification of Trade Secret Claims (docket nos. 51 and 63), to which United Services Automobile Association (“USAA”) has responded (docket no. 58); USAA’s Motion for Leave to Supplement Response to Mitek’s Motion for Pre-Discovery Identification of Trade Secrets (docket...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court in the above referenced products liability case, removed from state court and alleging strict products liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, gross negligence, and negligence relating to Defendant Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s (“Bayer’s”) contraceptive drug-releasing intrauterine system Mirena® (“Mirena”) and intr...
Views: 0
ORDER
In October 2006, Plaintiff applied for disability and disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. Plaintiff alleged that he had been unable to work since September 2006 due to various physical impairments. Defendant initially denied Plaintiffs application, and Plaintiff requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). ALJ Elizabeth Koennecke held a hearing on...
Views: 0
*812
ORDER
This Order addresses Plaintiff Saidrick Jackson’s motion to remand [Doc. 5]. The Court grants the motion and remands the entire case but denies Jackson’s request for attorneys’ fees.1
I.Jackson’s State-Court Petition and Wal-Mart’s Removal
This case arises out of the termination of Jackson’s employment with Defendant Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC (“WalMart”). Jackson sued Wal-Mart pro s...
Views: 0
ORDER Presently pending before the'Court is Defendant Federal Express Corporation’s (“Fed-Ex ”) Motion for Summary Judg*1029ment. [Dkt. 40.] Plaintiff Rachel Slinger filed this suit under Indiana State law, alleging that FedEx terminated her “because she refused to deliver a package she believed to contain marijuana without notifying law enforcement,” and that this action constituted a retaliato...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Detlef R. Hartmann (“plaintiff’), an inmate at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (“VCC”), Smyrna, Delaware, filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He proceeds pro se and was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The case proceeds on the corrected second amended complaint. (D.I. 46, 48) Presently before the court are motions for sum...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This case features a law firm as the unfortunate victim of a scam in which it lost $176,750. The law firm, Morris James LLP (“plaintiff’), now seeks to recover the money under the provisions of an insurance policy (“the Policy”) issued to it by Continental Casualty Company (“defendant”). Plaintiff originally filed its complaint against defendant on November 30, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GENNARO MATTIACCIO II,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1249 (CKK)
v.
DHA GROUP, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Marc...
Views: 0
Page 33984
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint or, In the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 33).1 This matter is fully briefed and ready for disposition.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Blood Live Bemba (“Bemba” or “Plaintiff’) is a native and citizen of The *1024Republic of Congo (Defendants’ Statement of Undisputed Facts (“DSU...
Views: 0
Page 34004
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court for consideration of a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 107) filed by Defendant, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., a memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 118) filed by Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and a reply memorandum (ECF No. 122) filed by Defendant. For the reasons that follow, this Court finds the motion not well taken...
Views: 0
Page 34053
OPINION & ORDER
Petitioner/Father filed this action against Respondent/Mother on September 25, 2012, seeking immediate return of the couple’s minor child to Switzerland, under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 42 U.S.C. § 11601 et seq. Petitioner contends that Respondent’s retention of the child in the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND AND ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER
I. INTRODUCTION
This action arises out of two purchase order agreements (the “Contracts”) under which the plaintiff, OsComp Systems, Inc. (“OsComp”), agreed to provide equipment and services to the defendant, Bakken Express, LLC (“Bakken”), for use in connection with Bakken’s efforts to extrac...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Jonathan David McCoy (McCoy) brings this action against the above-captioned defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of his First and Fourth Amendment rights which allegedly occurred during his arrest pursuant to City of Columbia Municipal Ordinance Section 10-34(b) (the Ordinance) on October 17, 2009. McCoy additionally seeks a declaratory judgment p...
Views: 0
ORDER CONFIRMING ARBITRATION AWARD
Before the Court is a Petition to Vacate Arbitration Award (ECF No. 1) filed by Petitioner Waveland Capital Partners, LLC (“Waveland”), and a Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award (ECF No. 11) filed by Randall A. and Helen E. Tommerup (“Tommerup”). Having reviewed the briefs and affidavits of the parties, and all the record in this case, the Court is prepared to r...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART CHARTIS’S RULE 12(b)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIMS OF TESORO CORPORATION AND TESORO REFINING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, RULE 12(e) MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT; (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART CHARTIS’S MOTION TO DISMISS CLAIMS IN FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE 12(b)(6) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT...
Views: 0
FINAL ORDER
I. Introduction
This case involves a class action lawsuit brought by marketing representatives employed by Defendant Affinity Health Plan, Inc. in the South Region for violations of federal and state labor law. Plaintiffs allege they have not been properly compensated for overtime hours worked for Defendant. Plaintiffs and Defendant reached a settlement approved by the Court on May ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
(Docket Nos. 274, 276)
I. INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion- to dismiss three counts of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”). Docket No. 274, 276.1 The superseding indictment in this case included eight counts for violations of the CFAA related to unauthorized access of a computerized database of his former emplo...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO BIFURCATE
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff John Doe No. 1 (herein “Plaintiff’) brings this action for damages arising from horrific sexual abuse he allegedly endured over a six-year period when he was a minor engaged in the activities of the Columbian Squires (“Squires”), the national youth program of defendant Kni...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc. (“LWD”), on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, brought this action against Shire LLC and Shire U.S., Inc. (collectively, “Shire” or “Defendants”), asserting a violation of 15 U.S.C. § 2. Shire filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Feder...
Views: 0
*1271ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR APPEAL BOND
Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion for appeal bond in this class action lawsuit against Clearwire Corporation (“Clear-wire”), which joins in the motion (Dkt. ## 107, 110). The case has settled, and the court has already granted final approval of the settlement. Now, several class members who have been accused of being “professional objectors” are app...
Views: 0
ORDER
This declaratory judgment action involves a dispute between an insured, Defendant Simon Roofing & Sheet Metal Company (“Simon”) and its excess insurer, Plaintiff American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Company (“American Guarantee”). Simon, a roofing company, was sued by one of its customers after allegedly causing considerable damage to the customer and its place of business. Simon info...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants1 Montefiore Medical Center (“MMC”), Elizabeth Burns, and Patricia Quinn (collectively, “Montefiore”) move to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), equitable estoppel, and breach of contract claims. Because Plaintiffs have not plausibly shown interference with statutory rights, reliance, and consideration, respectively, those three claims are ...
Views: 0
Page 34343
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Christie Ademiluyi filed a Class Action Complaint (the “Complaint,” ECF 1) against defendants PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust Holdings I, LLC (“PennyMac Holdings”) and PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust (“PennyMac Trust”) (collectively, “PennyMac”), asserting claims under state and federal law, based on defendants’ debt collection activities. Plaintiff contends, in...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Charles Cochran and Yvette Bullock, his wife, have sued defendants Marlton Auto Credit. (“Marlton”), A & E Cars & Trucks, Inc. (“A & E”), Stealth Recovery (“Stealth”), John Doe Repo-Man One and John Doe Repo-Man Two. The multi-count amended complaint contains claims under the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, 13 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 9609, and the Pennsylvania Motor V...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Edward Lincoln Forehand is charged with wire, mail, and securities fraud, and transacting in criminally derived property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1843 and 1341, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a), and 18 U.S.C. § 1957(a). Before the court is the government’s pretrial motion to exempt its expert witness from sequestration pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 615(c). For reasons th...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. )
) Criminal Action No. 10-274 (RWR)
ERIC HEMINGWAY, )
)
Defendant. )
_________...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
MONICA LORETO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1744 (RWR)
)
MYRA CUSH...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
-------------------------------------------------------
:
DR. ARIEL ROSITA KING, et al., : CASE NO. 11-CV-1124
:
Plaintiffs, :
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court are the cross-motions for summary judgment of the plaintiffs and the defendant (docket entries 37 and 39). For the reasons stated below, the plaintiffs’ motion is denied and the defendant’s motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
Scott Detgen (“Detgen”), Juanita Barazza (“Barazza”), Brandon Doyel (“Doyel”), and Joshua Vargas (“Vargas”...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PETER GEORGE ODHIAMBO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No...
Views: 0
Page 34541
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
RANDOLPH S. KOCH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s (“MetLife”) motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Royal Bradford Keife (“Keife”). Doc. # 136.1
Also before the court is MetLife’s motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Brenda J. Simon (“Simon”). Doc. #141.
I. Facts and Background
This consolidated class-action litigation involves alleged breaches of life i...
Views: 1
*716MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON THE PLAINTIFFS’ STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER AND MOTION TO STAY
On December 3, 2012, the defendant, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. (Pioneer), filed a “Motion to Stay and Compel Arbitration of the Claims of Kendra Wojtalewicz and the Claims Assignors.” (See ECF No. 28.) This motion was granted by United States Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Z...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants Clements and McCullar’s Motion to Dismiss Class Action Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief [Docket No. 14]. The Court’s jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs are inmates in the Colorado Department of Corrections (“CDOC”) who have been sentenced to indeterminate terms of imprisonment under the Colorado Sex Offender Lif...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE’S DECISION
This social security benefits appeal is before the Court under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Plaintiff Teresa Maiorano (“Plaintiff’) challenges the final decision of Defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”), denying her application for disability insurance benefits. The denial was affirmed by an administrative law judge (“ALJ”), who...
Views: 0
Page 34690
OPINION & ORDER
At the center of this action is the construction of a new interstate highway over the Columbia River, hereinafter referred to as the Columbia River Crossing Project (“CRC Project”). The CRC Project aims to replace two existing interstate highway bridges over the Columbia River with a new interstate bridge connecting Clark County, Washington, and Multnomah County, Oregon.1 Thompson...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on thirteen motions for summary judgment. The motions consist of one omnibus motion for summary judgment as to Count One of the Fifth Amended Complaint filed jointly by the Defendants, one motion for sum*123mary judgment as to Count Two filed by the Defendants named in that Count,1 and eleven separate motions for summary judgment filed by ea...
Views: 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
MOLLY GARDILL, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1726 (RWR)
)
DISTRICT ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 41) filed by defendant Pittsburgh Public Schools (“PPS” or the “district”) and a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 44) filed by defendant Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers (“PFT” or collectively with PPS, “defendants”). Plaintiff Emily Davis (“Davis” or “plaintiff’) initiated this action o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. ANALYSIS OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT...............................745
1. The Parties ............................................................745
*7442. Fushi’s Financial Reports................... 747
a. Fushi’s SWAP Transaction................ 747
b. Fushi’s Acquisition Practices............... 751
c. The Restatements........................ 755
d. Fushi’s I...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Michael T. Dolan (“plaintiff’ or “Dolan”) commenced this action alleging that defendants Fairbanks Capital Corp. (“FCC”)1 and PMI Mortgage Insurance Company (“PMI”) violated various federal and state laws in connection with the servicing of his mortgage and related foreclosure proceedings. Presently before the Court are separate motions made by FCC and PMI pu...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Juicy Couture, Inc. (“Juicy” or “Plaintiff’) brings this action against Defendants Bella International Limited, Juicy Girl Ltd., Gold Stable International Ltd., Goldstable International Corporation, John Suen, and Jessica Ching Ping Yang (collectively, “Defendants”) asserting, inter alia, claims for trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting and cybersquatting. B...
Views: 0
*455DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. #10); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS THERETO (DOC. # 11); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND (DOC. # 7)
Based on the reasoning and citations of authority set forth in the United States Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 10), issued February 25, 2013, as well as upon a thoroug...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs commenced this action against defendants G & P Auto Wash Inc. (“G & P”) and Greg Star (“Star”) (collectively, “defendants”) in September 2010. Three plaintiffs, Enrique Perez (“Enrique”), Geovany Antonio Albarado (“Albarado”), and Javier Cruz Perez (“Javier”), allege that defendants violated the minimum wage and overtime payment requirements set forth in the Fair L...
Views: 0
*398 OPINION AND ORDER During trial on the afternoon of March 7, 2013, Lashaun Casey (“defendant”) made an oral motion requesting that the Court limit the testimony of the government’s firearm expert, Edward Pérez-Benítez (“Mr. Pérez”) based upon several district .court opinions restricting ballistics evidence based upon studies conducted by the National Academy of Science (“the 2008 NAS report”...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on DEFENDANT UNITED GUARANTY’S MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH ITS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND RELATED MATTERS (Docket No. 480). For the reasons that follow, the motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 16, 2009, SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. (“ST”) filed in state court a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The matter before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“Motion”). [Docket No. 179.]
*1091I. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL OVERVIEW
A. The Substantive Legal Dispute
Plaintiffs allege that Defendants City of Los Angeles (“the City” or “Defendant”) unlawfully failed, and are failing, to properly install and maintain acc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On Wednesday, January 23, 2012, the undersigned magistrate judge was contacted on two occasions by counsel during depositions being taken by defendants of Northern’s witnesses. A dispute arose in the first deposition when it was determined that the witness had been provided with a CD containing documents selected by Northern’s counsel for his review prior to his deposition....
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Amey Cooper and Gregory Smith commenced this action against Defendants City of New Rochelle, Detective Michael O’Rourke, Detective John Pastore, Police Officers John Doe Numbers 1-5, Police Officer Jane Doe, and Detective John Doe, asserting federal claims for unreasonable search and seizure, false arrest, malicious prosecution, excessive force, conspiracy under 42...
Views: 0
Page 35086
OPINION
This case is before the court for ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment (# 124) filed by Defendants City of Urbana, Sylvia Morgan, Matthew Bain and Angela Menocci (Urbana Defendants), the Motion for Summary Judgment (# 130) filed by Defendants Daniel Walsh (Walsh) and County of Champaign, Illinois (Champaign County), the Motion for Summary Judgment (# 133) filed by Defendant Health ...
Views: 0
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs brief to proceed with the remaining claim within Count III of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint under the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”). (Doc 270). Plaintiff originally claimed that Defendants violated the SCA by accessing his Access2Go email, his Blackberry text messages, and his Yahoo! email, but the Court already determined t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Wendell and Cassandra Laseter entered into a contract with ClimateGuard Design & Installation, LLC (“ClimateGuard”) to purchase a new roof for their house, and took out a mortgage from Admirals Bank (“Admirals”) to finance the project. Two years later the roof began to leak, requiring thousands of dollars’ worth of repair. The Laseters brought this suit against Climat...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction [dkt 20]. The motion has been fully briefed, and on January 31, 2013, the Court held oral argument. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion is GRANTED.
II. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Thomas Monaghan (“Monaghan”) is the owner and sole shareholder of Plaintiff Domino’s Farms Corp.,...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs Mr. and Mrs. P., who are the parents of minor child R.P., have brought this action pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (the “IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”) against the Greenwich Board of Education (the “Board”) of the Greenwich Public School District. The Board ha...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARION KINDIG,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-CV-1919 (AK)
WHOLE FOODS MARKET
GROUP, INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Ms. Marion Kindig ("Plaintiff" o...
Views: 1
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs Lonny and Lea Bowers filed suit against Defendants United States of America, Andrew Tingley in his official and individual capacity as the Supervisory Deputy United States Marshal for the District of Connecticut, and Deputy U.S. Marshals John Does 1-4 in their individual and official capacities,1 alleging violations of their Fourth Amendment righ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PUBLIC INVESTORS ARBITRATION BAR
ASSOCIATION,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 11-2285 (BAH)
v. Judge Beryl A. Howell
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
D...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
ADRIAN K. BEAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0651 (EGS)...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CAROL GRUNEWALD, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-cv-1738 (RLW)
JONATHAN B. JARVIS, DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, et al.,
Defendants.
ME...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Tri-State Truck Insurance, Ltd., TST, Ltd. and Andrew B. Audet bring suit against First National Bank of Wamego (“FNB Wamego”) for making false statements in Uniform Commercial Code filings. See Complaint For Damages (Doc. # 1) filed May 5, 2012. Specifically, under Pennsylvania, Kansas and North Dakota law, plaintiffs assert claims for UCC violations (Count I), injurious f...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant, Intel Corporation’s (“Intel[’s]”) Motion for- Judgment on the Pleadings Pursuant to Rule 12(c) (“Motion”) [ECF No. 28], filed on January 14, 2013. Plaintiff, Esys Latin America, Inc. (“Esys”), filed a Complaint [ECF No. 1] on June 18, 2012. In an Order dated August 28, 2012 (“August 28 Order”) [ECF No. 22], the Court dismissed Count One of t...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the 30 May 2012 motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Dal-Tile Corporation (“Dal-Tile”). (DE # 60.) The motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition.
I. BACKGROUND1
Dal-Tile, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mohawk ESV, Inc., manufactures, distributes, and markets ceramic tile and natural stone products. (C. Diksa Aff., DE # 62-11, ¶¶ 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs originally filed this putative class lawsuit in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri. On or about June 21, 2012 defendants removed the case to federal court wherein it was assigned to this Court. This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs’ motion to remand [16], filed July 17, 2012. All responsive pleadings have now been filed and the matter is ripe for d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the court is Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). (D.I. 37). In March of 2010, David Yetter filed a complaint in Delaware Justice of the Peace Court 9 against William Rawheiser alleging non-payment of commissions earned pursuant to Plaintiffs employment with Wise Power Systems, Inc. (D.I. 37, Ex. B). The JP Co...
Views: 0
Page 35256
*337MEMORANDUM OPINION
Hercules Offshore, Inc. (“Hercules” or “the Company4’), a Delaware corporation, provides shallow-water offshore drilling and marine services to the oil and natural gas exploration and production industry. Pincus E. Raul (“Plaintiff’), a Hercules shareholder, brings this lawsuit derivatively on behalf of Hercules. Plaintiff alleges that the Hercules board of directors, assis...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment (Doe. 40) by the Defendant, the State of Louisiana, through Department of Justice, Office of Attorney General. The Motion is opposed (Docs. 44 and 47), and the Defendant filed a reply (Doc. 53). Jurisdiction exists pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1...
Views: 0
Page 35322
ORDER ON THE PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
In 1997, the state of Maine elected to cover noncitizens under its state Medicaid program and it continued to do so until June 2011, when the Maine Legislature passed Public Law 2011, chapter 380, section KK-4, terminating Medicaid-ineligible alien health benefit coverage. Noncitizens Hans Bruns and Kadra Hassan, on behalf of themselves a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
The matter before is the motion to dismiss contained within Defendant’s Memorandum Brief in Support of Combined Motion To Dismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment [# 19],1 filed June 29, 2012. I previously granted that portion of the motion seeking summary judgment as to plaintiffs Title VII claims, but ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefin...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Fifth Third Bank’s motion to dismiss Count II of Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank N.A.’s Complaint. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s partial motion to dismiss is well-taken and is GRANTED.
I. Background
Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) presents claims against Defendant Fifth Third Bank (“Fifth Third”) for breach of contrac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
The Court discussed the factual background, statutory framework of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1401 et seq., and procedural history of this matter in its Memorandum and Order, dated August 31, 2011, (“2011 Order”) resolving the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment and remanding the parties’ prior action to th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THE CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
This putative class action is brought by Suk Cheung, Scott Heiss, and Michael Zoitas on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased the common stock of A123 Systems, Inc. (A123), between February 28, 2011, and March 26, 2012. The proposed class was allegedly duped by misrepresentations disseminated by de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ SECOND RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 119);1 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 115)
Pending before this court is a third summary judgment motion filed by defendants American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Company (“American Guarantee”), Zurich North America Company (“Zurich”), Brown & Brown, Inc. (“B & B”),...
Views: 0
Page 35450
*461OPINION AND ORDER
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON GRIEVANCES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK1
This matter comes before the Committee on Grievances for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Committee”) to consider the imposition of discipline upon Respondent Gregory N. Filosa, a member of the bar of this Court, based on h...
Views: 1
Page 35457
*472OPINION AND ORDER
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON GRIEVANCES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK1
This matter comes before the Committee on Grievances for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Committee”) to consider the imposition of discipline upon Respondent Scott B. Gilly, a member of the bar of this Court, based on his ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Karen Bastedo, appearing pro se, commenced this action against her former employer, defendant North RoseWolcott Central School District, alleging causes of action for discrimination and retaliation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12112 et seq., and the New York Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290 et seq. Familiarity with the pe...
Views: 0
*843
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs commenced this civil rights case against seven City of Covington police officers, alleging claims for excessive force, deliberate indifference, malicious prosecution and violations of their Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, all under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs also assert state-law battery claims as well as claims for violati...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Caleb Morgan alleges that the HSBC, mortgagee of his personal residence, harmed his credit rating and his personal reputation when it misapplied his mortgage payments and inappropriately reported a deficiency to the credit rating agencies. [R. 1-1]. Morgan claims that HSBC’s actions give rise to liability under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Fair Credit Reporting ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In 1980, the Kentucky legislature enacted what is commonly referred to as the “Police Officer’s Bill of Rights.” Ky.Rev. Stat. Ann. (“KRS”) § 15.520 (Michie 2008). The statute provides certain procedural protections to officers employed by local governments that receive appropriations from the Commonwealth’s general fund. At times relevant to this action, Plaintiff Sh...
Views: 0
Page 35551
OPINION AND ORDER REJECTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, SUSTAINING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, VACATING ORDER OF REFERENCE, AND SCHEDULING STATUS CONFERENCE
The matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs objections to the report filed by Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk recommending that the defenda...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING CORP ONE INC’S MOTION TO REMAND
I. INTRODUCTION
This case involves principally claims brought by a commercial tenant against its landlord and the successor holder of an assignment of rents. Although these purely state-law claims were asserted in a state court action, the case was removed to this Court because the tenant, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Rogers Mantese & As...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This civil action is before the Court on the following motions: defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Counts I, III, and IV of the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. 65],1 Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify Question of State Law to the Tennessee Supreme Court [Doc. 81],2 Plaintiffs’ Motion for *911Leave to File Third Amended Complaint and to Join Additional Plaintiffs [Doc. 83],3 an...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court upon cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff Raquel Pascoal Williams (“Plaintiff’) filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (“Plaintiffs Motion”) (Doc. 9). Defendants Janet Napolitano (“Defendant Napolitano”), Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), and Alejandro Mayorkas, Director, United States Citizenship and Immigration Serv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The following motions are before the Court:
• Apple’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law under Rule 50(b). or, in the alternative, for a New Trial or a Remittitur (Docket No. 623);
• VirnetX’s Motion for Post-Verdict Damages to the Time of Judgment, Pre-Judgment Interest, and Post-Judgment Interest (Docket No. 620);
• VirnetX’s Amended Motion for Post-Verdict Dama...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
FREEDOM WATCH, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-2398 (RWR)
)
BARACK O...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Anthony Pratt, a prisoner currently incarcerated in the Watertown Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking damages and injunctive relief for claims arising from his alleged exposure to asbestos while being held in the Anna M. Koss Center (“AMKC”) on Rikers Island. The plaintiff brings this action against t...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Guard Insurance Group (“Guard,”) as the worker’s compensation insurer for named plaintiff Scott Baxter (“Baxter”), brings this action against Techtronie Industries Co., Ltd., Techtronie Industries North America, Inc., One World Technologies, Inc., Ryobi Technologies, Inc., and Home Depot, USA, Inc. (collectively “defendants”). Acting as the assignee of plaintiff...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
According to the allegations in his SetL ond Amended Complaint (the “SAC”), pro se Plaintiff Angelo Ruotolo hoped to purchase a home in foreclosure from Defendant Fannie Mae, the owner of the property. Plaintiff -claims that he attempted to submit an all-cash offer of $131,000 for the property, but Fannie Mae ultimately sold the property to someone else for $130,000. (SAC ¶¶ 1...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a case primarily about alleged infringements of trademarks and copyrights in the packaging for men’s thermal underwear. The plaintiff, Overseas Direct Import Co., Ltd. (“ODI”), brought this lawsuit against the defendants, Family Dollar Stores Inc. (“FDS”) and Prestige Global Co., Ltd. (“Prestige”). The plaintiff alleges primarily that the defendants have inf...
Views: 0
Page 35703
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I.
PROCEEDINGS
Staci D. Hardy (“plaintiff’), on behalf of her minor daughter J.M.H-B., filed this action on January 17, 2012, seeking review of the Commissioner’s denial of J.M.H-B.’s *1199applications for Child’s Insurance Benefits and a Lump-Sum Death Payment. The parties filed Consents to proceed before the undersigned Magistrate Judge on January 19, 2012, and Fe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
Plaintiff John B. Sender has filed suit against Defendant Franklin Resources, Inc. Under the current operative complaint (la, the second amended complaint or “SAC”), the only claim being asserted is an ERISA claim, more specifically a claim for benefits pursuan...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
Now before the Court is Defendants Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (“TMS”) and Toyota Motor Corporation’s (collectively “Defendants”) motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Mui Ho, Shelda Anglin, and Ted Flory’s (“Plaintiffs”) First Amended Class Action Complaint. ECF No. 27 (“MTD”); ECF No. 21 (“FAC”). The motion is...
Views: 4
Order & Opinion
Defendants Full Tilt Poker Ltd. (“Full Tilt”), Tiltware LLC, Vantage Ltd., Fileo Ltd., Kolyma Corp. A.V.V., Pocket Kings Ltd., Ranston Ltd., and Mail Media Ltd. (collectively, the “Corporate Defendants”), and Raymond Bitar (“Bitar”), Howard Lederer (“Lederer”), Christopher Ferguson (“Ferguson”), and Rafael Furst (“Furst”) (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”) have moved, p...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Docket No. 171)
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants Stephan Jenkins; Bradley Hargreaves; Third Eye Blind, Inc.; 3EB Touring, Inc.; and Stephan Jenkins Productions, Inc. bring the current motion for summary judgment or, alternatively, partial summary judgment of Plaintiff Anthony Fredianelli’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”).1 Plaintiffs compl...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS EXCESSIVE INSURANCE CLAIMS
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a putative class action brought by Plaintiffs Clifford McKenzie, Daniel and Robin Biddix (“the Biddixes”), David Kibiloski (“Kibiloski”), and Virginia Ryan (“Ryan”) (“Plaintiffs”) against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“WFBNA”), which at times does business as Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (“WFHM”), Wells Fargo Insurance, In...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AND VACATING HEARING
INTRODUCTION
In this action regarding debt-collection phone calls, plaintiff alleges defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq., and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“Rosenthal Act”), Cal. Civ. Code § 1788 et seq. Defendant moves for dismissal under FRCP 12(b)(6). After considera...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 10-256-19 (RMC)
)
HENRY DIAZ-ANTUNUEZ, )
...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence and Statements, filed January 24, 2013. (Doe. 36). Having carefully considered the submissions of counsel, and the evidence adduced at the March 4, 2013 hearing, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion. Fin...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (“ICSOP”) originally filed this action in New York State Supreme Court, New York County (the “State Court”), seeking a disputed payment from defendant TIG Insurance Company (“TIG”) and other declaratory relief for breach of contract. TIG removed the action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) based on the existe...
Views: 0
Amended Order on Motion to Dismiss and/or for Final Summary Judgment 1 THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and/or for Final Summary Judgment. D.E. 6. THE COURT has reviewed Defendant’s Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised on the premise. I. Motion for Summary Judgment Defendant Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (“Royal Caribbean”...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the court on its own motion, addressing the proposed jury instructions submitted by plaintiff in this case. These proposed instructions present difficult and unsettled issues of law, and, for the reasons discussed below, the court has decided to offer its best analysis of those issues and to thereupon certify this order for interlocutory appeal to the Fifth Circuit....
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs’ objection to an order issued by United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer granting defendants’ renewed motion to compel arbitration and staying this matter pending further proceedings. For the reasons set forth herein, the Court denies the plaintiffs’ objection and affirms the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Facts
The plaintiffs are...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
I. Introduction
This action arose from Defendants’ allegedly coerced removal of Plaintiffs’ children from their home without a court order or post-deprivation hearing based on an anonymous report of child abuse. Plaintiffs, D.M. (“Mother”) and D.M. (“Father”), have brought this action individually and on behal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Motion to Dismiss”), filed July 24, 2012. After carefully considering the motion, briefing, pleadings, and applicable law, the court grants in part and denies in part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Doc. 6).
I. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In 2010, when plaintiff was working for Sysco, he requested a twelve-week leave pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). Defendant Work & Well, Inc. was Sysco’s FMLA leave administrator. Plaintiff alleges that defendant wrongly told Sysco that he was not entitled to the last six weeks of leave he requested, and Sysco terminated him as a result. In the sole...
Views: 0
RULING RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 130) AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (Doc. No. 133).
JANET C. HALL, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Charles Gibson, Jr. (“Gibson”) brings this suit for breach of contract, civil fraud, and unjust enrichment against defendants Geza Scap (“Scap”) and JGS Pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On November 8, 2011, this Court published a memorandum and order in this case ordering Jiten Hotel Management, Inc. (“Jiten”) to pay $25,000 in attorney’s fees. Diaz v. Jiten Hotel Mgmt., Inc., 822 F.Supp.2d 74, 84 (D.Mass.2011). After an appeal by the plaintiff, Carmen Llerena Diaz (“Diaz”), the First Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded...
Views: 0
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT is The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 21), to which Plaintiff has responded (Dkt. 31). Upon consideration, the motion (Dkt. 21) is GRANTED.
I. Factual Background 1
On April 18, 2008, Kenton Mattingly was hired by the University of South Florida Tampa Police Department as a law enforcement officer (Dkt. 1 ¶ 8). USF requires all of its officers to work rotati...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 16). Plaintiff Debra Fledderman has filed an opposition (Doc. 21), and Defendant Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. has filed a reply (Doc. 35). This matter is now ripe for review.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
While the facts in this case are extensive, the most relevant facts, as construed in fa...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Bluemile, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “Bluemile”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for Declaratory Judgment. (Doc. 8.) For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED and this action hereby DISMISSED.
I. BACKGROUND
1. Factual History
Defendant Bluemile owns a Columbus data center that provides clients with cloud services, network se...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Toan Phuong Nghe’s motion to suppress fruits of unlawful entry and search (Dkt. No. 20) and motion to suppress statements (Dkt. No. 22). Having thoroughly considered the parties’ briefing and the relevant record, the Court finds an evidentiary hearing unnecessary and hereby GRANTS the motion to suppress fruit...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE Wyoming Highway Patrol Trooper Aaron Kirlin stopped a commercial truck-trailer rig driven by Defendants Donald Cornelius and Anthony Swift to conduct a random commercial vehicle inspection as authorized by the Wyoming Commercial Vehicle Act. During the inspection, Trooper Kirlin discovered marijuana in Defendants’ trailer and the United States ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Nicole Cady brings this action against Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company claiming wrongful denial of accidental death benefits under 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(1)(B). The parties have filed cross motions for summary judgment. The issues have been fully briefed and are ripe for the Court’s consideration.
Having fully reviewed the record herein, t...
Views: 0
Page 36300
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. (Docket No. 383.) We ordered the parties to brief the issue of class certification simultaneously to the court. *22(Docket No. 396.) The parties complied with that order and submitted simultaneous briefs. Plaintiffs filed a memorandum in support of class certification, and defendants submitted memorandums in oppos...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
Before the Court is the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) of defendants Essilor Industries (“defendant Essilor”) and Francois Deterre (“defendant Deterre”) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Docket No. 24.) Defendants seek to dismiss plaintiff Sobeida Irizarry-Santiago (“plaintiff Irizarry’O’...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff Huy Thanh Vo sues defendants U.S. Bank National Association, N.D. and *1083the law firm of Nelson & Kennard for unfair debt collection practices. U.S. Bank now moves to dismiss plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12.1
The motion came on for hearing on March 11, 2013. Having considered the matter, for the reasons set forth below, the court wi...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
Defendants’ motions to dismiss the second amended complaint for failure to state a claim came on for hearing before this court on December 5, 2012. Plaintiff Suzanne D. Jackson appeared by her counsel Alan H. Kaufman and Robert J. Stumpf; defendants Jon Sabes, Steven Sabes, and Marvin Siegel appeared by their counsel Tanya Herrera; defendants Mani Koolasuriya and...
Views: 3
OPIN ION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Susana Martinez (“Martinez”), Ninnette Justiniano (“Justiniano”), Julia Fazylova (“Fazylova”), Carol Stanberry (“Stanberry”), and Lorraine Thomas (“Thomas”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), present and former housekeeping personnel at the Hilton Times Square, bring this case under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) seeking unpaid ove...
Views: 0
Page 36334
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case involves a dispute between Plaintiff Barbara Poole, Associate Professor of Finance at Roger Williams University, and several co-workers, Defendants Scott P. Mackey, Minoo Tehrani and Michael Melton, as well as unspecified John Does and Mary Roes, and Roger Williams University. Plaintiff’s Amended Verified Complaint (“the Complaint”) is comprised of six state-law c...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Davis sues defendant Hollins Law, A Professional Corporation, alleging violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p (“FDCPA”) and California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1788-1788.38 (“Rosenthal Act”).
Defendant has filed motions to dismiss and/or to strike plaintiffs second cause of action, wh...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. #15) IN THEIR ENTIRETY; DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO SAID JUDICIAL FILING (DOC. #16) OVERRULED; JUDGMENT TO BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER, REVERSING THE COMMISSIONER’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING AS UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND REMANDING THE CAPTIONED CAUSE TO THE...
Views: 0
*403MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case involves a contract, personally guaranteed by the three businessmen, for a bank loan to allow for the purchase of a former St. Andrews University dormitory in Scotland to be developed into fractional ownership units. It is undisputed that the Defendants, Bernard Wasserman, Richard Wasserman, and David Wasserman, breached the contract and that the personal guarant...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT’S COUNTERCLAIM
Plaintiff Tobe Morrow suffered injuries after he was bucked from a horse during a guided horseback ride conducted by Defendant Xanterra Parks & Resorts. Mr. Morrow brought suit against Xanterra and four John Doe defendants, alleging that his injuries resulted from Defendants’ negligence. Xanterra counterclaimed against Mr. Morr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Rule 17 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides a clear framework for the use of the court to compel the appearance of witnesses and the production of documents in federal court. Rule 17 does not authorize the government or the defense to subpoena a witness and require him to report at some time or place other than where a trial proceeding is to be held at which the...
Views: 0
Page 36484
MEMORANDUM ORDER
The plaintiffs, Elena Katz and Arnold Grodman,1 have brought a 32-count *319amended complaint against 24 separately named defendants, principally alleging violations of the United States Constitution and state law. The plaintiffs’ claims arise out of their loss of legal custody of their daughter, Eleonora, to the New Hampshire Department of Children, Youth and Families (“DCYF”)...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal Action No. 08-284 (JDB)
STACY MOORE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Defendant Stacy Moore seeks to ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RAJNIKANT PATEL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on supplemental briefing relating to defendant Govplace’s motion for summary judgment. Govplace’s Supp. Mem. ISO its Mot. Summ. J. (“Govplace’s Supp. Mem.”), Sept. 25, 2012, ECF No. 168; Relator’s Supp. Mem. ISO its Opp’n to Def.’s Mot. Summ. J. (“Rel.’s Supp. Mem.”), Sept. 25, 2012, ECF No. 169. Upon consideration of the *125parties’ supplemen...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SALLAH HAMAMIN ABDULLA, )
)
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CARMEN JEAN-BAPTISTE )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER CORRECTING THE DOCKET ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE THE BRANDSTETTER AFFIDAVITS ORDER GRANTING CARGILL’S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER OF DISMISSAL ORDER CERTIFYING APPEAL NOT TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH AND ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
Before the Court are the Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Car-gill, Inc. (“Cargill” or “Defendant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Patrick Hughes (“Hughes”) and Nafise Nina Hodjat (“Hodjat”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) bring this class action in diversity on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated against Ester-C Company (a subsidiary of NBTY, Inc.), NBTY, Inc., and NatureSmart LLC (collectively, “defendants” or “Ester-C Co.”). Specifically, plaintiffs allege that defendants have d...
Views: 0
Page 36682
ORDER: (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND; (2) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
On March 6, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand to State Court (doc. # 17). Jeff Small, Esq., and Olga Brown, Esq., appeared at the hearing on behalf of Plaintiff; Margaret Cheryl Kirby, Esq., appeared on behalf of Defendants. After reviewing the M...
Views: 1
ORDER
On this day, the Court considered five motions in the above-captioned case, including Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 23; Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 24; Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Evidence, ECF No. 28; Plaintiffs Motion for an Oral Hearing, ECF No. 34; and Defendant’s Motion to Strike Evidence, ECF No. 37. For the reasons set forth below, each of the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ AMENDED MOTION TO DISMISS
On March 16, 2012, Plaintiffs John Does I-IV and Mary Doe initiated the above-*807captioned lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Michigan Sex Offender Registry Act (“SORA” or “Act”), as amended in 2011. Governor Richard Snyder and Colonel Kriste Etue of the Michigan Department of State Police ...
Views: 0
Page 36728
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANITA BYRD,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 10-cv-1809 (RLW)
TOM VILSACK, Secretary,
United States Department of Agriculture,
Defendant.
...
Views: 1
Page 36729
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LIBERTARIAN NATIONAL
COMMITTEE, INC.,
Civil Action No. 11-cv-562 (RLW)
Plaintiff,
v.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALAN J. HAYES,
doing business as WETT,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action 12-740 (RC)
v.
FM BROADCAST STATION
WETT(FM), et al.,
D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Tarireef White (“movant”) is a federal inmate currently confined at the Federal Correctional Institution in Fairton, New Jersey. Movant timely filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (D.I. 51) Respondent filed an answer in opposition (D.I. 59), to which movant filed a response (D.I. 60). For the reasons discussed, th...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANGELA BLOUNT, et al., for themselves
and those similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-809 (JDB)
U.S. SECURITY ASSOCIATES, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION &...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
WENDY MURPHY )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 12-864(EGS)
v. )
)
LIVINGSOC...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Terrence Anderson (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Wilmington, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 2) For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BA...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Fred T. Caldwell (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Wilmington, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 1) For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BAC...
Views: 0
ORDER
On February 17, 2012, B. Grant Yarber (‘Yarber” or “plaintiff’) filed a complaint against Capital Bank, Capital Bank Corporation (collectively, “Capital Bank”) and Capital Bank Financial Corporation (“CBFC”) (collectively, “defendants”) alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), breach of contract, and tortious interference with a contract in conne...
Views: 1
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff John G. Simmermon III and Plaintiff A. Simmermon Corporation, d/b/a A-Jack’s Towing (“A-Jacks”), brought this action against Defendant Monroe Township and eight Township officials, alleging discriminatory and retaliatory enforcement of towing and zoning laws against Plaintiffs. This matter now comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motions to Amend the Complaint [...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT ECF NO. 165
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant Cherry Creek South Metropolitan District No. 2’s et al. (“Defendants”) Joint Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”). (ECF No. 165.) Plaintiff Stroh Ranch Development, LLC (“Plaintiff’ or “SRD”) has filed a Response, (ECF No. 184) and Defendants have filed a Reply. (ECF 196.) At the Court’...
Views: 0
Page 36870
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer filed on February 22, 2013 [Docket No. 38]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on Febr...
Views: 0
Page 36881
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING PART MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Amerijet International, Inc.’s Motion to Strike Counts I, II, and III and to Dismiss Counts IV, V, and VI of the First Amended Complaint (D.E. No. 31), filed on November 20, 2012. Plaintiff International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“IBT”) submitted its first amended com*1339plaint on November...
Views: 1
Page 36882
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon several dismissal motions filed by Defendants: Defendants Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Wells Fargo Securities LLC (f/k/a Wachovia Capital Markets LLC), J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. (£/k/a Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.), UBS Securities LLC, and Barclays Capital Inc.’s Joint Motion to Dismiss [DE 58...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
THIS CAUSE is before the court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Request for Oral Argument [DE 6]. The Court has considered the motion, Defendants’ response [DE 10], the evidence presented and arguments of counsel at the March 8, 2013, hearing, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
I. BACKGROUND
On January 22, 2013, Plain...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER is before the Court on AHMSI and Deutsche Bank’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 7], The Court has carefully considered the motion, response, reply, oral argument of counsel at a hearing held on February 27, 2013, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
Introduction
Plaintiff, Madelaine Martorella (“Martorella”), has brought this action ag...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 11] filed by defendants. James E. Girards and James E. Girards, P.C. Defendants move to dismiss the complaint [Docket No. 17] filed by plaintiff Klein Frank, P.C. (“Klein Frank”) on the grounds that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over them.
I. BACKGROUND1
This case arises out of a state personál injury lawsuit filed...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s, United States of America, Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 12). Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons stated herein, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
Plaintiff Jonathan Boyd (“Boyd”) alleges his personal medical ...
Views: 0
*721DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. #11) IN THEIR ENTIRETY; DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO SAID JUDICIAL FILING (DOC. #12) OVERRULED; JUDGMENT TO BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER, REVERSING COMMISSIONER’S DECISION THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT DISABLED WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, AND REMANDING ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. #16) IN THEIR ENTIRETY; DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO SAID JUDICIAL FILING (DOC. #17) OVERRULED; JUDGMENT TO BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER, REVERSING COMMISSIONER’S DECISION THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT DISABLED AND, THEREFORE, NOT ENTITLED TO BENEFITS UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURIT...
Views: 0
Page 36979
MEMORANDUM I. Introduction Plaintiffs Sarahjane Blum, Ryan Shapiro, Lana Lehr, Lauren Gazzola, and Iver Robert Johnson III, dedicated animal rights activists, bring this facial and as-applied challenge to the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (“AETA”),1 a criminal statute that prohibits acts of violence against animal enterprises and the persons and entities connected with those enterprises. Plain...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are: Defendant 1 Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company’s (“Fireman’s Fund”) first Motion for Summary Judgment against the claims of South Louisiana Ethanol, L.L.C. (“SLE”); Defendants Commerce & Industry Insurance Company and Chartis Speciality Insurance Company’s (collectively, “C & I and Chartis”) Motion • for Summary Judgment against the claims of SLE; Third-par...
Views: 0
Page 36989
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant Powerhouse Diesel Services, Inc.’s (“Powerhouse”) Motion to Transfer Venue.1 After considering the motion, the memorandum in support, the opposition, the reply, the record, and the applicable law, the Court will grant the motion.
*720
I. Background
A. Factual Background
On July 22, 2010, Plaintiff U.S United Ocean Services, LLC (“UOS”) and Def...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING SOGRO INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 69), DENYING ARMES’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 79) AND SETTING A SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
Chris Armes sues Sogro, Inc., claiming that Sogro generated customer receipts displaying more than the last five digits and expiration dates of credit cards, in contravention of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA)...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Since 2009, plaintiffs Six Star Holdings, LLC and Ferol, LLC have sought to open night clubs featuring erotic dance entertainment in the downtown area of the City of Milwaukee. In order to both serve liquor and present erotic dancing, *944the plaintiffs had to obtain two licenses under the Milwaukee Code of Ordinances: a tavern license and a “tavern amusement” license. In Aug...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION [# 31]
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 15, 2011, Plaintiffs, United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC (“USW”), and Plaintiffs Ronald Strait and Danny 0. Stevens filed the instant action against Defendants, Kelsey-Hayes Company, TRW Auto...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff MPM Silicones, LLC (“Plaintiff’ or “MPM”), commenced this action on December 30, 2011, by filing a Complaint against Defendant Union Carbide Corporation (“Defendant” or “Union Carbide”) seeking to recover the costs Plaintiff incurred in identifying and responding to Defendant’s release of hazardous chemicals under the Comprehensive Environ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Andy Montanez filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Officer Vincent Fico used excessive force against him in connection with an arrest on March 20, 2009, and that Officer Joseph Simon failed to intervene to prevent the use of excessive force. Following a 3 1/2-day trial, on June 15, 2012, the jury found in favor of Plaintiff on his excessive forc...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Russian citizens Tamara Starshinova (“Starshinova”), Marina Vasilyanskaya (“Vasilyanskaya”), and Rafail Tzentziper (“Tzentziper”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and as assignees for *480551 individuals set forth in Schedule A of their Amended Complaint, bring this action seeking millions of dollars in damages for an alleged massive fraud involving various fu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
In this action, pro se Plaintiffs 3607 Broadway Food Center, Inc. (“3607 Broadway”) and its owners Juan F. Guzman and Francisco G. Guzman challenge an administrative decision of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) disqualifying 3607 Broadway from participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (“SNAP”) for six years. (See Am. Cmplt. ¶ I...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On November 30, 2011, Plaintiff Burton T. Fried1 filed this action [Doc. # 1] against his former employer, Defendant LVI Services, Inc. and Defendant LVI Parent Corp. (collectively “LVI”), and his employer’s CEO, Defendant Scott E. State, claiming age discrimination under the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (“CFEPA”), Conn. Gen.Stat. § 4...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Agustine Castillo (“Plaintiff’ or “Castillo”) commenced this case individually, and on behalf of a similarly situated class of individuals. The complaint seeks overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 207 (the “FLSA”), and a parallel provision of New York State law. Defendants are Taco Bell of America, LLC and Taco Bell Corp. (coll...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS AND DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR TEMPORARY STAY
Presently pending before the Court is a motion by Defendant Nintendo of America, Inc. (“Nintendo”) to compel Plaintiff Joubin Rahimi to arbitrate the claims raised in his complaint in accordance with the Federal Abitration Act (“FAA”). Nintendo has also filed a motion asking the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Docket No. 20)
DMP has filed a Complaint against The Fay School, by and through its Board of Trustees (“Fay”) alleging claims for violation of Title III the American with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189 (“ADA”) (Count I); and breach of contract (Count II). DMP seeks monetary and injunctive relief. This Memorandum of D...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE
Plaintiff Simi Management Corporation, d/b/a Connell Auto Center operated car dealerships. After selling its last franchises in August 2007, Plaintiff discovered that its long-time chief financial officer (“CFO”) Roger Reichart had embezzled millions of dollars from the firm v...
Views: 0
REDACTED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to compel testimony and production of information withheld on the basis of privilege by Plaintiff pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 37(a). (R. 184, Mot. to Compel.) Specifically, Defendants seek production of (1) privileged and non-privileged- documents and items' in Plaintiffs possession mentioning,...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SIERRA CLUB,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-993 (CKK)
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Mar...
Views: 0
Page 37355
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ASSOCIATION OF PRIVATE SECTOR
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES,
Plaintiff,
v.
ARNE DUNCAN, in his official capacity
as Secretary of the Department of
Civi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is again before the Court on Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 75), the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 92), and Defendant’s Objection to the Recommendation (Doc. # 100).1 In support of his renewed motion, Defendant cites to the pleadings previously submitted and considered in this act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction This is a collective action seeking overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA” or the “Act”) brought by fifty-four Fire Suppression Lieutenants (“Plaintiffs”) against their employer, the City of Montgomery (the “City”). Plaintiffs contend that the City failed to properly classify them as nonexempt “first responders” and to pay them certain...
Views: 0
Page 37387
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Vicky Chao (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the Delores J. Baylor Women’s Correctional Institution *586in New Castle, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (D.I. 1), and the State’s motion to dismiss the application for lack of subject matter jurisdict...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Aníbal Melendez (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Wilmington, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 2) For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACK...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PLUMBERS LOCAL #200 PENSION
FUND, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 10-01835 (BJR)
v. MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is Counter-Defendant Arch Wood Protection, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) motion to dismiss Counter-Plaintiff Flamedxx’s (“Plaintiff’) amended counterclaim (“counterclaim”) (Court File No. 66).1 Defendant argues Plaintiffs counterclaim fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted because Defendant was not obligated to perform the duties serving as the basis of Plainti...
Views: 0
Page 37432
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
IN RE PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG )
LITIGATION )
) Misc. Action No. 07-493 (RMC)
This document relates...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Defendant Caraustar Industries, Inc., is the parent company of defendant Caraustar Custom Packing Group, Inc., which, in turn, runs Chicago Carton, a paperboard products manufacturing facility on Chicago’s west side. The plaintiffs are several employees of that facility who claim they were underpaid for the hours they worked.
In their complaint, they alle...
Views: 0
ORDER
The magistrate judge to whom this matter was referred has filed a Report and Recommendation with respect to the respondent’s motion to dismiss or alternately for summary judgment. The petitioner objects to the Report and Recommendation for three reasons.
He first contends that his security classification as a sex offender violates his due process rights under the Fifth Amendment *172becau...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), filed by Defendants ManorCare Health Services, LLC (MHS) and HCR ManorCare, Inc. (HCR). Plaintiff Lucinda Dalton (Dalton) resists. A hearing was not requested, and the Court finds a hearing is unnecessary. Accordingly, the matter is fully submitted and ready for disposit...
Views: 0
Page 37456
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________
)
SODEXO OPERATIONS, LLC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-108 (RWR)
)
NO...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause is before the court on Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to Apply New Jersey Punitive Damages Law with Supporting Memorandum of Law. (Doc. 36). Plaintiff William Krause filed a response in opposition to this motion. (Doc. 40). Defendant also filed supplements to this motion in which ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs motion to remand [DE 23]. A hearing on this motion was held on March 7, 2012 in Raleigh, North Carolina. For the reasons stated herein, the plaintiffs motion to remand is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
Generally, this case concerns the operations of dental service organizations (DSOs) in the State of North Carolina. DSOs operate to assist dentists ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM1
Before the Court are plea agreements between Defendants Christopher Wright, Ra-vinder Chawla, Andrew Teitelman, and the Government pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Rule allows the Government and a defendant to enter into a plea agreement that provides for a specific sentence. The agreement is subject to the approval of a district judge. If t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
This multidistrict litigation involves allegations that defendant egg producers and trade groups conspired to restrict the supply of eggs in this country. After the Defendants successfully moved to partially dismiss the Second Amended Complaint to the extent the claims for damages fell outside the applicable statutes of limitations, the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs...
Views: 0
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
After reviewing the objections to the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and conducting a de novo-review of those parts of the Findings and Conclusions to which objections have been made, I am of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Matthew Valente and James Valente filed the instant products liability action in New York state court against Defendants Textron and the E-Z Go Division of Textron. Matthew Valente was seriously injured while operating a golf cart made by Defendants and alleges that Defendants are liable under a theory of strict liability, negligence, breach of implied warranty and...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs Judith and Edward Roller— mother and son — sue police officers Timothy Hilderbrand, Dennis Gallego, Gary Hoffkins, and Roger Wachnicki, for their involvement in a search of the Rollers’ home that was conducted on May 15, 2007 pursuant, to-, a valid search warrant. Plaintiffs claim that Defendants unreasonably destroyed Plaintiffs’ property or fail...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Plaintiffs in this putative class action allege that a circuit board defect (the “Defect”) caused their Samsung refrigerators to stop cooling. Plaintiffs assert claims for the violation of various consumer protection laws, fraudulent concealment, and breach of implied warranty. Defendants Samsung Electronics, America, Inc. (“SEA”) and Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd. (“SEC”) (together “...
Views: 0
RULING ON CROSS — MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions [Doc. ## 64, 69] for summary judgment on Plaintiffs claims of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Count One), unlawful retaliation under § 1981 (Count Two), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count *333Three), race discrimination under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Cou...
Views: 0
RULING ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS
Following a jury trial held May 18 through June 5, 2012, the jury returned a verdict on June 11, 2012 finding Defendant FujiFilm Medical Systems U.S.A., Inc. (“FMSU”) liable on Plaintiff John Weber’s claimed breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and finding Defendants FujiFilm Holdings America Corporation (“HLUS”) and Fu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. #20]
The Plaintiffs Linda Seifert (“Linda”), Timothy Seifert (“Timothy”), and Laura Seifert (“Laura”) bring this action against City of Waterbury Detectives Defendants Orlando Rivera (“Detective Rivera”) and Kenneth Borer (“Detective Borer”), alleging two federal law claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for unlawful entry an...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________________
)
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOR )
ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Clifton B. Davidson has filed a motion seeking relief from the Order dismissing his complaint filed under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (“FOIA”). Davidson’s motion also seeks an order awarding him court costs of $793.00, arguing that he has “substantially prevailed” in this FOIA action. [R. 26] The Court will deny Davidson’s motion because h...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on (1) SunTrust Bank’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Class Action Complaint (Doc. # 35) filed on May 11, 2012, and (2) Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Class Action Complaint (Doc. #43) filed on May 29, 2012. Plaintiffs filed an Omnibus Opposition (Doc. # 47) on June 22, 2012. On August 15, 2012, Wells Fargo Bank, N....
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant Lexington Insurance Company’s (“Lexington”) Motion to Dismiss,1 wherein Lexington seeks the dismissal of all claims against it by Plaintiffs NOLA Ventures, LLC, NOLA Restaurant Group, LLC, and Critical Mass Holdings, LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”).. After reviewing the complaint, the pending motion, the memorandum in support, the opposition, the...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court is Appellant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Appeal from a decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana Adversary Case No. 06-1093 (Adv. R. Docs. 470 and 471). (Rec. Doc. No. 11). Appellee Michael L. Jones filed a response brief. (Rec. Doc. No. 12). Appellant filed a reply brief thereto. (Rec. Doc. No. 13).
Appellant, Wells Fargo Bank, N...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs' William and Ann Allen and Denise Angles (“the Allens”) brought this' action alleging that defendants Western Union (and related entities) (“Western Union”), Fannie Mae, and Bank of America, N.A. (and related entities) (“BANA”), violated provisions of state and federal law in providing mortgage servicing and mortgage payment services to the Allens. Western Union and BANA h...
Views: 3
ORDER
In a single killing spree Jerry Correll murdered four victims, including his ex-wife and their five-year old daughter. Correll petitions for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 71) and challenges the validity of both his convictions for four murders and his four death sentences. Correll asserts numerous errors allegedly committed by both the trial court and his attorney...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pro se plaintiffs Joyce Hamlett and Letricia Hamlett (“plaintiffs”) filed a complaint against Santander Consumer USA, Inc. (“Santander”), HSBC Auto Finance, and HSBC Auto Credit, Inc. (collectively, “defendants”) on December 15, 2011. On March 12, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.
On April 30, 2012, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed an a...
Views: 1
ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on the pleadings. (Doc. #210). Plaintiff filed a response in opposition (# 213), and defendant filed a reply (doc. # 214).
Aso before the court is plaintiffs motion for an order striking the following two documents by defendant: (1) defendant’s prior response to the motion for class certification (doc. # 171); and...
Views: 0
ORDER Currently before the Court are Defendants United Technologies Corporation, United Technologies Realty, Inc., Carrier Corporation, Carrier Commercial Refrigeration, Inc., and Wells Bloomfield, LLC’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Damages (# 53) and Plaintiff Wells Enterprises’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Causation (# 54). BACKGROUND Plaintiff Wells Enterprises leases commer...
Views: 0
ORDER ON SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Lindsey Durlacher was injured while snowmobiling near Ryan Park, Wyoming, after Defendant Rocky Hoffschneider — a Colorado citizen — allegedly crashed his snowmobile into Mr. Durlacher’s snowmobile. Mr. Durlacher died a few months later. After Mr. Durlacher’s death, a state district court appointed Plaintiffs Michael and David Durlacher — Mr. Durlacher’s broth...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS After Plaintiff Wallace Tolman broke his hip and femur in an ATV accident, he went to a hospital in Billings, Montana, where a doctor surgically inserted a medical device called the Gamma Nail # 3 to stabilize Mr. Tolman’s hip and femur. Months later, the gamma nail snapped while Mr. Tolman was at his home in Wyoming, causing...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendants Allergan, Inc.; Allergan USA, Inc.; and Allergan Sales, LLC (collectively, “Allergan”); Serenity Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Serenity Pharmaceuticals, LLC (collectively, “Serenity”), Reprise Biopharmaceutics, LLC (“Reprise”), Dr. Seymour H. Fein (“Fein”) and Dr. Ronald V. Nardi (“Nardi”) (collectively, the “Defendants”) have moved pursuant to Rules 8, 9(b), and 12(b)(6) of F...
Views: 1
RULING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment filed by Plaintiffs Oxford House, Inc., Danjean Causeway LLC, and Raymond and Glenda Roy (collectively “Oxford House”) (Doc. 82) and Defendant City of Baton Rouge (“City”) (Doc. 88). Defendants have filed an opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion (Doc. 100), to which Plaintiffs have file...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING PETITION TO ENFORCE NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD ORDER
Petitioner John Hylan was terminated from his position as a locomotive engineer by his employer, Respondent Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company. Mr. Hylan and his union — Petitioner Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen — then filed a grievance with the Nation...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
By motion dated December 4, 2012, plaintiff Bayerische Landesbank (“Bayerische”) seeks leave to file a second amended complaint adding Aladdin Capital Holdings LLC (“ACH”) as a defendant in this action with respect to its gross negligence claim (“Second Amended Complaint”), with relation back under Rule 15(c)(1)(C), Fed.R.Civ.P., to the date plaintiff filed its original compla...
Views: 1
ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM
Plaintiffs brought this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants the County of Sacramento, the Department of Health and Human Services (“DHHS”), Child Protective Services (“CPS”), CPS employees, and Sacramento County counsel based on an investigation by CPS and the removal of a minor child from p...
Views: 0
ORDER
Background
A criminal complaint docketed July 30, 2012, alleged: “On, about, or between December 1-31, 2011, in Grand Canyon Village, Arizona, within the confines of Grand Canyon National Park, an area within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States”, Defendant failed to provide medical attention to an animal to prevent its suffering “in violation of Title 18, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Cheryl F. Cohens1 sued the Maryland Department of Human Resources (the “DHR”)2 for employment discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”),3 the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (the “EPA”),4 the Maryland Equal Pay Act (the “MEPA”),5 and Title 20 of the State Government Article of the Maryland Code (“Title 20”)6. Pending are Cohens’s motion for r...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARC HIMMELSTEIN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1475 (JEB)
COMCAST OF THE
DISTRICT, L.L.C., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
As the Court explained in an earlie...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The plaintiff, Sean P. McMahon, brings this action against General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products, Inc. (“General Dynamics”),1' for violations of New Jersey’s Products Liability Act (“NJPLA”). Plaintiffs claims arise out of the test firing of an M2 .50 caliber Browning machine gun, Heavy Barrel (“M2”) at Forward Operating Base Kunduz, Afghanistan, on July 4, 2010. McM...
Views: 0
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Report and Recommendation accepted and adopted.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON MOTIONS TO QUASH AND TO SEVER
DEIN, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The plaintiff, Patrick Collins, Inc. (“Patrick Collins”), is the registered owner of the copyright to the adult motion picture “Big Wet Brazilian Asses 7.” It has brought this action against 38 unid...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Chong Vang’s objection to the February 11, 2013 Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge Janie S. Mayeron. Judge Mayeron recommends granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denying Vang’s motion for summary judgment. The Court has conducted a de novo review. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Trevor Cook operated one of the largest Ponzi schemes in the history of Minnesota. In August 2009, just a few months before the government shut down Cook and his fraudulent enterprise, Cook filed a state-court action against Lynn Edward Baker and several entities affiliated with Baker, including Mesa Holdings, Inc. (“Mesa”). In that lawsuit, Cook essentially alleged that he had been defraud...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1030
A. Factual Background................................................1030
1. Siouxland......................................... 1031
2. Expansion of Siouxland.........................................
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants United States of America, Department of the Interior (“DOI”), Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”), Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”), Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (“BSEE”), Office of Natural Resources Revenue (“ONRR”), Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), Lisa P...
Views: 0
Page 38329
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Dayna Charlayne Smith (“Smith”) seeks judicial review pursuant to the Social Security Act (“Act”),1 more specifically 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1388(c)(3), of the final decision of then Commissioner of Social Security Michael Astrue (“Commissioner”) 2 denying Smith’s claim for social *892security disability income (“SSDI”) and supplemental security income (“SSI”). Smi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT VAL E. KILMER, V’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO TRANSFER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Val E. Kilmer, V’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 3), filed Nov. 30, 2012. The Court finds that Defendant’s motion is well taken and shall be GRANTED.
Plaintiff, Executive Consulting, Inc. (through its president, Ellen Colemire) file...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ motion to dismiss [20] is granted. Plaintiffs motion for class certification [41] is denied as moot. Additionally, Plaintiffs motion for leave to file a sur-reply [26] is granted; the Court considered Plaintiffs sur-reply [26] and Defendants’ objection to Plaintiffs sur-reply [29] in deciding Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Fin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner Richard T. Balsavage brings this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 At the conclu*508sion of a Gagnon II Hearing (“Gagnon sentencing hearing”) to address Balsavage’s probation violation, the presiding judge (the “Gagnon Judge”) sentenced Balsavage to 3 to 7 years of incarceration, followed by 42 years of probation. Balsavage appealed this sen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY COURT
Appellants MaddenSewell LLP and Steven Thrasher appeal an order from the bankruptcy court which dismissed their motion for reconsideration for lack of jurisdiction as the order from which Appellants requested relief was on appeal. Appellants contend that the bankruptcy court actually had jurisdiction to issue an indicative ruling pursuant to Fe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A 16-year-old girl sits in a squad car talking to a police officer. The girl’s father kicked a wall in her bedroom, she tells the officer. And hit her in the face with a pillow and kneed her in the back, which is why she called 911.. Starting to cry, she tells the officer: “I want to get out of here. I ...
Views: 0
*412RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
In this action, Plaintiff Known Litigation Holdings, LLC, the successor assignee of Domestic Bank, seeks to recover insurance proceeds from Defendants Navigators Insurance Company, Navigators Management Ltd., and certain interested underwriters of Lloyd’s of London (collectively “Defendants” or “Navigators”), in its capacity as loss payee under several ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on six motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants in these related actions: (1) Defendant Crane Co.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (CV 12-00793, Docket No. 193); (2) Defendant The Nash Engineering Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (CV 12-00793, Docket No. 195); (3) Defendant Alfa Laval’s Motion for Su...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff Mary Stapleton initiated this action against Defendant DSW, Inc. (“DSW”) alleging wrongful termination.2 The Complaint asserts a claim under New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act and a common law claim for wrongful discharge. Pending before the Court is DSW’s motion to dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). For the reaso...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant The Delaware Law School of Widener University, Inc. (“Widener”) moves for dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Amended Class Action Complaint (“Amended Complaint”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint alleges Widener posted to its website, and disseminated to third-party law school evaluators, misleading and incomplete graduate employment rates...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court for oral argument on Plaintiffs’ pending Motions to Transfer [ECF No. 39]. Plaintiffs have brought actions against numerous brand name and generic pharmaceutical manufacturers (collectively referred to as “Wyeth Defendants” or “Defendants”), seeking damages for personal injuries suffered as a result of being exposed to the prescription drug...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court has reviewed the record and deems a hearing unnecessary. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This case sounds in employment discrimination. Plaintiff Steven Bennett is a natural person who resides in the state of ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Prison Legal News’s (“PLN”) Motion for *1195Partial Summary Judgment, Permanent Injunction, and Declaratory Judgment. (Doc. 85.) Defendants have filed a Response and -Cross-motion for Partial Summary Judgment. (Doc. 102.) Each motion is granted in part, denied in part, and deferred in part. In addition, PLN filed a Motion for Surreply (Doc. 134), which ...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs National Mining Association and Nuclear Energy Institute (“NMA/NEI”) and Plaintiff Northwest Mining Association (“NWMA”) have filed motions for partial summary judgment in this consolidated action. Docs. 73,1 90. Plaintiffs assert in counts one and seven of their respective complaints that the Secretary of the Department of the Interior’s withdrawal of more than one million acres from m...
Views: 0
*849
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. NO. 55] AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. NO. 53]
Pending before the Court are the parties’ competing motions for summary judgment. The plaintiff, the West Virginia Mutual Insurance Company (“West Virginia Mutual”), seeks a declaration that the available limit of liability under the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This dispute concerns contracts entered into between plaintiffs Jeffrey Santos (“Santos”) and Kathleen Edwards (“Edwards”) (collectively “plaintiffs”) and the City of Fall River in the waning days of the administration of Mayor Robert Correia (“Correia” or “the outgoing Mayor”). Mayor Correia appointed plaintiffs to positions within a municipal agency and agreed, on behalf of t...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Todd Greenwald brings this case under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Greenwald asserts three claims for relief. His first claim is for benefits under the Wells Fargo Short-Term Disability Plan (the “STD Plan” or “the Plan”). Greenwald argues that Wells Fargo and Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston erroneously denie...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant LeadRev Inc.’s (“LeadRev”) motion to transfer or motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3), as well as 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). (Doc. # 26).1 Plaintiff Diane Pfister filed a response (doc. #32) and LeadRev filed a reply (doc. # 34).
I. Background Facts
This case is brought by plaintiff Diane Pfister as a pu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, assert that Defendants Duane Reade, Inc. and Duane Reade Holdings, Inc. (collectively “DR”) violated the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (“FLSA”), and New York Labor Law § 650 et seq. (“NYLL”), by failing to *411compensate their assistant store managers (“ASMs”) for hours worked in ex...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This action arises out of Defendants Shasta Technologies, LLC (“Shasta”), Instacare Corp. (“Instaeare”), Pharmatech Solutions, Inc. (“Pharmatech”), and Conductive Technologies, Inc.’s (“Conductive”) (collectively, “Defendants”) development and sale of GenStrips: blood glucose test strips intended f...
Views: 0
Page 38724
DECISION AND ORDER
This Decision and Order addresses Defendant Aurora Health Care Inc.’s (“Aurora”), summary judgment motion, brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Civil Local Rule 56.1, for *1083dismissal of the race discrimination and retaliation claims and this entire action, and award of costs. (ECF No. 17.) The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”) filed t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Crystal Larry (“Larry”) brought this lawsuit against her former employer Bagcraft Papercon I, LLC (“Bagcraft”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., alleging sexual harassment as well as retaliation for reporting the harassment and filing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). (Compl...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff Steve Mahoney (“Mahoney” or “the Plaintiff’) brought suit against the Defendant Yamaha Motor Corp. U.S.A. (“Yamaha” or “the Defendant”) for manufacturing and design defects, arising from an alleged accident that occurred while the Plaintiff was riding a motorcycle made by the Defendant. In light of the Plaintiffs motion to discontinue the ease, the D...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff L.K. (“Plaintiff’ or the “Parent”) on behalf of her son, Q.S., brings an action against the Northeast School District, also known as Webutuck Central School District (“Defendant” or the “District”) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq., seeking to overturn the determination of the State Review Officer (“SRO”) that the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Virginia Community College System, Northern Virginia Community College’s (“NVCC”) Motion for Summary Judgment. [Dkt. 24.] For the following reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. Background
This case arises out of a national origin discrimination claim and a retaliation for prior protected activit...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. )
) Crin1inal No. 08-171 (RCL)
MARK STUBBLEFIELD, )
) =e ~ l
Defendant. ) gm w
l m :: iii
C§g_rir, i§t.i>,i‘ii‘)'»:'s*rt\\ct. ann
MEMORANDUM OPINION @H'='\\*»643 F.3d 291, 297 (D.C. Cir. 201l) ("At trial,
the govemment presented testimony from numerous witnesses to the six charged bank robberies,
ea...
Views: 1
*451
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion for Class Certification of Lead Plaintiffs Hawaii Annuity Trust for Operating Engineers’ (“Hawaii”) and New England Carpenters Guaranteed Annuity Fund (“NE Carpenters”). In this suit, Lead Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, Sanofi and two of its former top executives, violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on two occasions,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the Court is plaintiff State of New York’s Motion in Limine [Rec. Doc. 256] and Memorandum of Law in Support [Rec. Doc. 256-1], defendants One Adams Blvd. Realty Corp., Michael Adamowicz III, and Elizabeth M. Fraser’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition [Rec. Doc. 257], and plaintiffs Reply Memorandum of Law in Support [Rec. Doc. 258]. Also before the Court are the plaintif...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment and supporting documents. See Docs. 68, 69, 71, 72,75, 76, 77, 79 and 89.1 On December 5, 2012, the Court conducted a hearing on the motions.2 The parties have agreed that this Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) case may be finally and completely resolved on their cross-motions for summary judgment, in lieu of a non-jury...
Views: 0
Page 38804
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BABATU M. RUDO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-02172 ...
Views: 0
Page 38805
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
COAL RIVER ENERGY, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1648 (BJR)
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM OPINION
OF THE INTERIOR and its Secretary,
KENNETH SALAZAR,
D...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RAMONA WILSON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No.: 1:11-CV-00973 (JDB)
SUPERCLUB IBIZA, LLC,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal Case No. 12-157 (RMC)
)
VIVIAN ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DICK ANTHONY HELLER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 08-1289 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Buoyed by his success in Distric...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEAN ARLO ARP, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 13-67 (JEB)
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPIN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court for disposition is the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Thomas Built Buses, Inc. in this strict product liability case. The parties have briefed their respective positions, and the motion is ripe for disposition.
Background
Plaintiff Michelle Gonzalez (hereinafter “plaintiff’)1 was involved in an incident on or about November 27, 2007 that led to the in...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHARAD I. BHATNAGAR, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
SYLVIA MENIFEE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-252 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 22, 2011, Plaintiff Lynne Smith filed suit against Automatic Data Processing, Inc. (“ADP”) and The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”) (collectively, “Defendants”) under the Employment and Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) § 502(a)(1)(B), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). *625(D.I. 1). As an ADP employee, Ms. Smith participated in a Long Te...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SIMONE L. GREGGS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-11...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court is U.S. Bank’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (6). (D.I. 35). Additionally, Banner has moved to dismiss Bancorp’s counterclaims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (D.I. 37).
Banner issued an insurance policy on the life of Robert Daniels. The owner of the policy was Mr. Daniel’s law fi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RICHARD MAURICE GABLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. Introduction
Before the Court is Claimant Randall Keith Colburn’s (“Claimant”) Motion to Dismiss and for Return of Seized Funds, filed on July 11, 2012. (Doc. 6.) Claimant’s brief in support of the motion was contemporaneously filed. (Doc. 7.) Pursuant to this Court’s Order (Doc. 9), Plaintiff the United States of America (the “Government”) filed a responsive brief in opposition to the m...
Views: 0
*475RULING RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO JAMES COSTELLO (Doc. No. 93) AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO ARON MOORE (Doc. No. 98)1
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs James Costello and Aron Moore bring this action against defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Home Depot”), alleging that they were not paid for overtime work in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (the...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs Carol M. Ness, Jay Xiong, and Timothy J. Peters bring this action on behalf of themselves and a putative class against Defendants Gurstel Chargo, P.A. (“Gurstel Chargo”); TEM Capital, L.L.C. (“TEM”); Todd Gurstel (“Gurstel”); Mitch Chargo (“Chargo”); and John/Jane Does 1-20 alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and of Minnesota state law. This ca...
Views: 1
*472
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending is Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendants’ compliance with discovery requests. ECF No. 50-2. In accordance with Local Rule 104.7, counsel for all parties held multiple telephonic conferences concerning the production of documents for tile class period alleged in this action (February 9, 2007 to October 22, 2008), but could not agree on the scope of the...
Views: 0
*23DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ REVISED AND SUPPLEMENTED MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
Hannaford grocery stores suffered a massive technological intrusion at their retail points of sale during the period December 7, 2007 through March 10, 2008. Customers’ debit and credit card data was stolen, and many lawsuits against Hannaford followed. After rulings by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court si...
Views: 1
ORDER:
(1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS, (Doc. No. 50);
(2) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, (Doc. No. 49); AND
(3) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY,
(Doc. No. 41).
Plaintiff Harold Anthony Velarde (“Plaintiff’), a prisoner at Calipatria State Prison, has brought a single claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on Defendant E. Duarte’s (“Defendant” or “Duarte”) alleged use of excessive...
Views: 0
*905MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Jason Meyers, International Capital Financial Resources, Stephen von Haase, and CTA Worldwide filed a motion in which they asked to join in, incorporate, and adopt the motion and arguments of Stefan Benger and SHB Capital, Inc. to dismiss Counts I to III of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s complaint charging them with violations of Section 10(b)...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, plaintiffs JBCHoldings NY, LLC and Janou Pakter, LLC bring federal claims arising under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030 et seq., and the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq., and common law claims of fraud, breach of contract, tortious interference with contract, tortious interference with business relations, and an accounting. Def...
Views: 1
Page 39160
ORDER AND OPINION APPLYING CERCLA’S “ACT OF WAR” DEFENSE TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
Plaintiff, Cedar & Washington Associates, LLC (“Cedar & Washington”), the owner of a 12-story property at 130 Cedar Street, one block south of the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, filed this lawsuit to recover substantial cleanup and abatement expenses to remove pulverized dust that infiltrated into its bu...
Views: 0
*782MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 88) filed by plaintiff Hilda Solis, Secretary of the United States Department of Labor (the “Secretary”), against defendant Gregory Makozy (“defendant”). This action arises from defendant’s involvement with A-l Mortgage Corporation (“A-l”), a mortgage brokerage firm. Defendant’s wife, Maria...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs Comité de Apoyo a los Trabajadores Agrícolas (“CATA”), Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (“PCUN”), Alliance of Forest Workers and Harvesters (“the Alliance”), and Salvador Martinez Barrera challenge federal regulations promulgated by Defendant agency, the Department of Labor. The case is now before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Permanent Injunctive Relief. (Doc. N...
Views: 0
Page 39188
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a bankruptcy appeal. Debtors James Albert D’Angelo, Senior, and Carolyn Marie D’Angelo (collectively, “debtors”) appeal from a decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granting in part J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s (“JPM”) Motion to Dismiss, permissively abstaining from certain of debtors’ claims, and denying the...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has charged the defendants with having engaged in an international boiler room scheme targeting some 1400 foreign investors. The alleged scheme took in approximately $44 million primarily through the sale of penny stock. Of the proceeds, the defendants skimmed 60% as purported commissions for themselves and the foreign boiler...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) claims that the defendants engaged in an international boiler room scheme targeting some 1400 foreign investors. The scheme took in approximately $44 million primarily through the sale of U.S. penny stock. It is alleged that of the proceeds, the defendants skimmed 60% for themselves and the foreign boiler room operators who a...
Views: 0
*237
MEMORANDUM RE: MOVANTS’ MOTIONS FOR INTERVENTION OR JOINDER AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
I. Introduction
Seldom do people or entities fight hard to become parties to litigation. However, the existence of an insurance policy may provide the ordinarily lacking motivation. This dispute resonates from Mozart’s The Marriage of Figaro: Did the Count properly “intervene” in Figaro’...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STANFORD B. WEINSTEIN, :
:
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, : Civil Action No.: 10-1768 (RC)
:
v. : ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
BRIAN BILES )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 11-1997
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
BETTY CLAYTON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1889 (RWR)
)
DISTRICT OF COL...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Title V of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987 (“McKinney Act”) requires federal agencies to make their unneeded property available for use by the homeless. 42 U.S.C. § 11411. Defendants have moved the Court to vacate a twenty-year-old judicial Order designed to ensure federal agencies’ compliance with that statute. Defs.’ Mot. To Vacate, EOF No. 568. Plai...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEBRA L. HARTLEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1185 (JEB)
OFFICER WILFERT, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Debra Hartley walked 225 miles from her hom...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
David Bardes filed this lawsuit on May 3, 2011, against Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, alleging that Mass-Mutual filed W2s with various governmental entities that falsely asserted the payment of money to Mr. Bardes. (Doc. 2.) Mr. Bardes was allowed to proceed in forma pauperis on his state-law fraud and fraud-related claims. (Doc. 4 at p. 23.)1 After s...
Views: 0
REVISED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE, AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ RENEWED MOTION FOR ABSTENTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on three pending motions. After considering those motions and relevant briefing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff Wildearth Guardians’ (“Wildearth’s”) Motion for Partial Sum...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of the United States Magistrate Judge wherein he recommends that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand be granted and Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs be denied (Doc. # 23). No objections to the Magistrate Judge’s R & R have been filed, and the time do so . has ...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Plaintiff, Willie Collins’s (“Collins[’s]”) Motion for Class Certification (“Motion”) [ECF No. 43], filed on February 6, 2013. Defendant, Erin Capital Management, LLC (“Erin Capital”), filed its Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification (“Response”) [ECF No. 44] on February 25, 2013, and Collins filed his Reply [ECF No. 45] on ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (DE 12) and Defendant’s Request for Oral Argument (DE 15). The Court has carefully considered the motions, response, reply, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
I. Background
Plaintiff Nicole Cenat (“Plaintiff’) brings this two-count Amended Complaint (DE 9, “...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the court is the Defendant Reliant Bank’s Motion for Summary-Judgment (Docket No. 28), to which the plaintiff has filed a response (Docket No. 44), and the defendant has filed a reply (Docket No. 47). Also before the court is the Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 31), to which the defendant has filed a response (Docket No. 36). For the reasons ...
Views: 0
Page 39399
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jeanna E. Hussey brings this action against defendants New York State Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”), and James Rogers, Eugene Leff, Katherine Kennedy and Janice Dean in their individual capacities.1 She sues the OAG for race discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the individual defendants for race di...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Findings and Recommendation having been filed and served on all parties on February 20, 2013, and no objections having been filed by any party,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 74.2, the “Findings and Recommendation to Grant in Part and Deny in Part ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiff brings this class action under the Employee Retirement Income Security *300Act (“ERISA”) §§ 404 and 406. Plaintiff claims that after class members invested in Defendants’ Lending Funds and appointed Defendants as trustee and investment manager, Defendants engaged in prohibited transactions and breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence. Accordin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This case arises from a breakdown of relationships in the McKeon family and the consequential impact on the family business. Plaintiffs Asymmetrx Medical, Inc. (“AMI”), AsymmetRx, Inc. (“AI”), Dr. Frank McKeon (“Dr. McKeon”), Peter McKeon (“Mr. McKeon”), Dr. Annie Yang Weaver (“Dr. Weaver”), Nana Yamamoto and Matthew P. Vincent (“Mr. Vincent”) (collectively, “the plaintiffs” or...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
On October 31, 2011, plaintiff Derek Sincere Black Wolf Cryer (“Cryer”), a state prisoner at the Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center (“SBCC”),1 filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 -U.S.C. § 1983 alleging first amendment violations in connection with his free exercise of religion, and violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Perso...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal from a ruling of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts. The sole issue is whether the Bankruptcy Court correctly interpreted 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A) in ruling that the automatic stay remained in effect with respect to the property of the bankruptcy estate beyond thirty days after the appellee, David Ackell (“debtor”), filed a ch...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Karmaloop, Inc. (“Karmaloop”) brings this action against Defendant ODW Logistics, Inc. (“ODW”) for breach of contract and related tort claims. ODW now moves to transfer this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. For the following reasons, ODW’s Motion to Transfer [# 7] is ALLOWED.
II. Factual Backgroun...
Views: 0
Page 39471
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs brought this ERISA action against former employers, certain other entities, and one individual connected with the severance plans at issue in this case. In conjunction with their briefs opposing Defendants’ motion for entry of judgment on the. administrative record, Plaintiffs have moved to compel discovery and supplement the record (Docket # 72). Because resolution...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (the “Motion”). (Doc. 74). Defendants have also filed a Statement of Facts in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 75). Plaintiffs have filed a Response to Defendants’ Motion (Doc. 81), a controverting statement of facts disputing Defendants’ statement of facts (Doc. 85), and another controverting statement o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Keiju Pu (“Pu”), filed a five-count complaint against defendant, Columbia College Chicago (“Columbia”), alleging discrimination and retaliation in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“the ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq. (counts I and II), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“the ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq. (counts III and IV), and...
Views: 0
Page 39561
RULING ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff/counterclaim defendant National Grange Mutual Insurance Company, *375Inc. (“National Grange”), and defendants Judson Construction, Inc., Nathan Judson and Patrie Murray and defendant/counterclaim plaintiff The Estate of Crystal Slater have filed cross motions for summary judgment. For the reasons set for below, the plaintiffs motion for sum...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
James L. Kapsis (“plaintiff’) commenced this action, on behalf of himself and a class of individuals similarly situated, against American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. (“AHMSI”) and Argent Mortgage Company, LLC (“Argent”). Plaintiff alleged that AHMSI violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15' U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act...
Views: 0
This Opinion addresses cross-motions for summary judgment filed by The Associated Press (“AP”), a news cooperative, and Meltwater U.S. Holdings Inc., Melt-water News U.S. Inc., and Meltwater *541News US1 Inc. (collectively “Meltwater”), an Internet media monitoring service. In this action, AP principally contends that Meltwater is infringing AP’s copyright in its published news stories. Meltwater ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Mobileye, Inc. and Mobileye Technologies Ltd. (collectively, “Mobileye”) bring this action against defendants Picitup Corp., Picitup Israel, Ltd., iOn-Road Ltd., and iOnRoad Technologies Ltd. (collectively, “iOnRoad”) asserting twelve federal and state-law causes of action. Mobileye is an Israeli-based manufacturer of single-camera-based Advanced Driver Assistance S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On November 14, 2011, plaintiffs Ernest Steve Barry (“Barry” or “plaintiff’) and Michael Burkhart (“Burkhart”) commenced this civil rights action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the City of New York, the New York City Transit Authori*419ty (“TA” or “defendant”), and Officer Steven Dutes, a member of the New York City Police Department, alleging false arrest, assault,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lisa Young (“Young” or “Plaintiff’) brings this action claiming violations *349of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1985 and 1986.. Defendants Lord & Taylor LLC, (“Lord & Taylor”), NRDC Equity Partners1, Nicole Cintorino, Kr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Chester Widomski brings this action against Defendant State University of New York (SUNY) at Orange, also known as Orange County Community College (“OCCC”), alleging violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12132 et seq., and the New York Human Rights Law, 15 N.Y. Exec. L. § 296(2)(a). (Second Amend. Compl. at Ex. A (“SAC”) ¶...
Views: 0
Page 39620
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this qui tarn action1 brought under the False Claims Act (“FCA”),2 the relators allege that defendant knowingly submitted false claims to the United States in connection with a United States Depart*829ment of State contract to provide security services in Afghanistan. As often occurs in FCA actions, defendant here seeks threshold dismissal, arguing (i) that the relators’ c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Craig Spence moves to remand this action back to the Jefferson Circuit Court on grounds that Defendant Volume Services America, Inc. d/b/a Centerplate (“Centerplate”) has failed to show that this Court has jurisdiction over the matter. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that the amount in controversy is less than $75,000, and therefore, this Court does not main...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This putative class action was brought by plaintiffs Lee and Alice Berger (“the Bergers”) against Bank of America, N.A., successor by merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (“BAC”) (collectively “Bank of America”) for breach of their mortgage contract and of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The Bergers allege that defendants breached their mortgage contract ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the court are Defendant Allstate Insurance Company’s (“Allstate”) three motions for partial summary judgment against Plaintiff Denise D. Dees. (1/31/13 Mot. (Dkt. #36); 2/7/13 Mot. (Dkt. #40); 2/12/13 Mot. (Dkt. #45).)1 Ms. Dees opposes all three motions in part. (2/15/13 Resp. (Dkt. #-53); 2/25/13 Resp. (Dkt. #57); 3/4/13 R...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are observant Jewish teachers and nurses employed by East Ramapo Central School District (“Defendant” or the “District”). Pursuant to two collective bargaining agreements with the District, Plaintiffs are entitled to take paid days off from work for religious observance, which are charged to Plaintiffs’ sick leave. The District is refusing to abide by those provisio...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal Action No. 07-235 (JDB)
KEVIN QUATTLEBAUM,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant Kevin Quattlebaum seeks to reduce his 126-month sentence for co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending are cross motions for summary judgment by plaintiff Anita Clark and defendant Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. (“Nationwide”), each filed on July 27, 2012.1 For the reasons that follow, the court grants summary judgment in favor of Nationwide.
I. Background
This matter arises from Nationwide’s denial of Clark’s long term disability benefits claim and is befor...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint.1 The matter is fully briefed.2 After a careful review of the record, the Court grants the Motion and dismisses the Complaint3 without prejudice.
I. Background
This is an action seeking unpaid minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et...
Views: 0
*443
DECISION AND ORDER
By order dated September 28, 2012, the Court appointed Houston Municipal Employees Pension System (“HMEPS”) as Lead Plaintiff in the consolidated action In re KIT Digital, Inc. Securities Litigation,1 and named Bernstein Liebhard LLP as Lead Counsel. (Dkt. No. 48.) This Decision and Order sets forth the Court’s findings, reasoning, and conclusions in support of its Septe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
1. Introduction
On November 8, 2010, Plaintiff Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated (“Morgan Stanley”) filed a Complaint against Defendant Peak Ridge Master SPC LTD (“Peak Ridge”). Plaintiff alleges Defendant, an energy hedge fund, breached the contract governing a natural gas futures trading account (“the account”) held with Morgan Stanley, causing Plaintiff to terminate the ac...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 12(c)”). For reasons that follow, Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED in its entirety.
1. BACKGROUND
The following facts, except where noted, are drawn from the Complaint and are undisputed for present...
Views: 0
*459
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On October 24, 2012 Magistrate Judge Viktor Pohorelsky issued a Memorandum *460Order directing the disclosure of portions of grand jury testimony by John Doe and James Doe, witnesses before federal grand juries in California and Georgia, respectively, which were investigating price-fixing in the air cargo industry. ECF No. 1764. On November 30, 2012 John Doe, James Doe...
Views: 0
*440
RULING ON THE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is an action to recover compensatory damages and punitive damages to redress an alleged violation of the plaintiffs rights to freedom from false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution. The plaintiff, Richard Sharnick, brings this action against Officer Dennis D’Archangelo and Detective Frank A. Podpolucha. The defend...
Views: 0
RULING ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DECERTIFY FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION
Plaintiffs Omar Morrison, Manuel Toppins and Carli Galasso, move for certification of two classes: the first class consisting of all persons who have worked for the defendant, Ocean State Jobbers, Inc. (“Ocean State”), as an Assistant Manager (“ASM”) in Connecticut at any time between...
Views: 0
OPINION
Todd M. Houston, a disabled volunteer firefighter, brings this action against the Township of Randolph, the Township of Randolph Volunteer Fire Department (“RVFD” or the “Department”), and RVFD’s Chief, John McAndrew (“Chief McAndrew”). Houston alleges violations of his Free Speech, Due • Process, and Equal Protection rights, the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA”), ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I. INTRODUCTION
In this diversity action, Plaintiff Contech Castings, LLC has brought suit against Defendant ZF Steering Systems, LLC for Defendant’s failure to pay approximately $3.868 million for automotive parts Plaintiff sold to it. According to Plaintiff, that failure to pay has created ...
Views: 1
Page 40052
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Filed with Classified
) Information Security Orficcr
MOHAMMED SULAYMON BARRE
(...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
PENNY E. KRIESCH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants Breathitt County Board of Education, Charles Mitchell, Arch Turner, and Reggie Hamilton. (DE 27). This action stems from Plaintiffs allegations of sexual harassment and abuse at Sebastian Middle School, which is within the Breathitt County Kentucky School System. Defendants assert that all ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant AT & T Services, Inc.’s (“AT & T”) Motion for Summary Judgment on the claims of Plaintiff Sharon Thomas (ECF # 29). Plaintiff Thomas brings claims of race discrimination1 and retaliation under Ohio Revised Code. § 4112.02.2
Even when viewed in a light most favorable to Plaintiff, the evidence does not support her claims tha...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Meshalle Jones seeks judicial review of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The district court has jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3). The parties consented to the undersigned’s exercise of jurisdiction in *937accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Civil Rule 73. (Doc. 14). For ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Background
Sharonlee Smith (“Smith”) and her husband, Bernard Smith (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), filed suit in Baltimore County (Maryland) Circuit Court against Giant Food, LLC (“Giant”), and two Giant employees, Mike Haines and Jerry Gans (collectively, “Defendants”), claiming false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, civil conspiracy, and loss of conso...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pending before the Court are Defendants Suffolk County, Vincent F. DeMarco, Joseph T. Caracappa, and John P. Meyerricks’ (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Consolidated Amended Complaint” or “CAC”) (Docket Entry 344) and Plaintiffs Mack Butler, Dashaun Sims, Clyde Lofton, Paul Alver, Kevin King, and Rickey Lync...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is what was originally brought solely as a motion to dismiss by defendant Superior Dairy, Inc. (“defendant” or “Superior”) pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff Terry Kovac (“plaintiff’ or “Kovac”) has filed a memorandum in opposition (ECF No. 7), and Superior has filed a reply (ECF No. 8). In order to dispose of an issue raised i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Christine Crowley filed this action alleging Defendant St. Rita’s Medical Center (“St. Rita”) terminated her employment because she raised concerns about Defendant John Renner, St. Rita’s chief financial officer, intentionally falsifying corporate financial documents. She asks this Court to recognize a new public policy exception to Ohio’s emp...
Views: 0
Page 40249
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
This matter is before me on the motion of Defendant John J. Nye to dismiss Plaintiff Jeffrey Nadeau’s complaint pursuant to Rulés 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6), and 12(c). (Doc. No., 12). Nadeau filed a brief in opposition. (Doc. No. 13). Nye has filed a brief in reply. (Doc. No. 14). For the reasons stated below, Nye’s motion is granted.. '
Background
Nadeau is a t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff SolidFX, LLC (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against Defendant Jep*1075pesen Sanderson, Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq., as well as common law contract and quasi-contract claims. (Sec. Am. Comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court takes no pleasure in issuing this ruling on defendants’ pending motion for sanctions. According to plaintiff, this matter can be reduced to nothing more than “an honest mistake” by counsel involving an “inadvertent failure to timely produce a document.” (Doc. No. 330, Plaintiffs Post-Hear*489ing Brief at 10233.) Plaintiff suggests that the facts that caused ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER1 Before the Court is the motion to dismiss or impose other sanctions filed by defendant Ford Motor Company (“defendant Ford”), based on spoliation of evidence. (Docket No. 31.) Having considered defendant Ford’s motion, (Docket No. 31); plaintiffs Roberto Torres-Talavera, Evelyn M. Jimenez-Garcia, and Aida Luz Talavera-Santiago’s (collectively “plaintiffs”) opposition, (Docket No...
Views: 0
Page 40412
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Thomas R. Ames brings this action under. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) against Michael P. Randle, Terry McCann, Anthony Ramos, Frank Shaw, Marvin Reed,, Anna Dockery and John Doe (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging violations of the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. (R. 34, Am. Compl. ¶¶ 1-2.) Presently before the Court is Defendants’ motion to di...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Kane County, Utah seeks to' quiet title to fifteen roads that cross lands owned by the United States.1 Kane County asserts the roads are public highways under R.S. 2477 and it is the owner of the rights-of-way. The United States has challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear claims on nine of the roads because it claims there is no case or c...
Views: 0
Page 40437
OPINION AND ORDER
T.B. and D.B. (“Plaintiffs”) brought this action pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq., and New York Education Law § 4404.3, seeking to overturn the determination of the State Review Officer (“SRO”) that the Haverstraw-Stony Point Central School District (“District”) is not required to reimburse Plaintiffs for their unil...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (“Order”), the Court addresses three motions by Defendants, Board of County Commissioners for the County of Sandoval (“Board”), John Paul Trujillo, Tim Lucero, and Edd Morrison. First, the Court denies the OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTATION OF THEIR RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is plaintiffs Janet Sobel and Daniel Dugan’s (“Plaintiffs”) Motion for Class Certification (# 2551), to which defendant The Hertz Corporation (“Hertz”) has responded (# 262), and Plaintiffs have replied (# 276). Also before the court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (# 295) and Hertz’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (# 298). Hertz has responded (#3...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Mount Vernon Neighborhood Health Center (“Mount Vernon” or “Defendant”) removed the present action from state court. Plaintiff James J. Veneruso (“Veneruso” or “Plaintiff’), acting on behalf of Community Choice Health Plan of Westchester Inc. (“CCHP”), moves to remand this case back to state court and for attorneys’ fees. With leave of the Court, *617the New York Sta...
Views: 0
Page 40523
OPINION & ORDER
In this putative class action, lead plaintiff City of Austin Police Retirement System (“Austin”) claims that defendants Kinross Gold Corporation (“Kinross” or the “Company”) and four individual Kinross officers violated §§ 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78t(a), and the United States Securities and Exchange Commis...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William H. Baughman, Jr. The Report and Recommendation (ECF # 14), submitted on February 6, 2013, recommending that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (ECF # 5) be granted in part as to Plaintiffs federal claims, and that Plaintiffs claims based in Ohio law b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Brian Chenensky brings this putative class action against Defendants New York Life Insurance Company, New York Life Insurance and Annuity Corporation, and NYLIFE Insurance Company of Arizona (collectively “New York Life”) alleging violations of the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) for impermissible wage-deductions. Chenensky moves to amend his complaint and New York Life...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Charles Anderson, individually and on behalf of a putative class, brings this action against the Holy See, the Catholic Bishop of Chicago (“Bishop”) and all ad*957ministrative units of the Roman Catholic Church (“Church”) in the United States, alleging that he was sexually abused by priests and other employees of the Church in the 1950s and 1960s. (R. 1, Compl.) And...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Daveri Development Group, LLC (“Daveri”) submitted an application to the Defendant Village of Wheeling (“Wheeling”) to obtain zoning approval for an apartment building for individuals with mental disabilities who are capable of living independently. Wheeling denied the application citing zoning concerns. As a result of the denial, Daveri, along with Plaint...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se Plaintiffs Darrick and Yolanda Grimes originally filed this action in 2008 against Fremont General Corporation and Fremont Investment and Loan (collectively “FGC” or “the Fremont Defendants”); WCS Lending LLC (“WCS”); several other identified corporate entities and named individuals; and multiple John/Jane Does and XYZ-Corporations. Plaintiffs asserted a variety of fede...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF A WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY The primary plaintiff in this case, Cara Munn, was a fifteen year-old student on a school trip abroad when she was infected with an insect-borne disease. The disease left her permanently disabled. She, along with her parents, has sued the trip’s sponsor, the Hotchkiss School, for damages that resulted from t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
3M COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-cv-1527 (RLW)
BOULTER, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before t...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
Defendant Santander Consumer USA, Inc. called plaintiff Heather Nelson’s cellular telephone number more than 1000 times over the course of a year in an attempt to collect a debt on two vehicles plaintiff had financed. In May 2010 defen*922dant Santander repossessed one of those vehicles. (Plaintiff alleges that defendants American Recovery Service and AssetsBiz Corp. assisted Sa...
Views: 0
*1322Order
I. INTRODUCTION
This cause comes before the Court for consideration of Defendant Abbott Laboratories’ (“Abbott”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint With Prejudice (Doc. No. 13), Plaintiff Scott Chapman’s Memorandum in Response (Doc. No. 22), and Abbott’s court-authorized Reply (Doc. No. 26). After carefully considering the motion to dismiss, the Court concludes that it must be gran...
Views: 0
ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Defendants Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and Aurora Bank, FSB’s Motion to Dismiss [# 6], to which Plaintiff Jose Luis Jaimes, Jr., has not responded.1 Having reviewed the documents, the governing law, and the file as a whole, the Court now enters the following opinion ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, plaintiff Johnson Poku Okyere brings claims against defendants Todd Houslanger, Houslanger and Associates, PLLC (collectively, the “Houslanger Defendants”), and Palisades Collection, LLC (“Palisades”) for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (the “FDCPA”), and conversion. Okyere has also sued Ronald Moses, a New York Ci...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES ex rei. JOHN DOE, )
)
Plaintiff, Relator, )
)
v. ) Civil Cas...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
EARNEST DURANT, Jr., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are two dispositive motions: defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings on plaintiffs’ class action claim under the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act (CSPA), Ohio Rev.Code § 1345.01 et seq. (Doc. No. 16); and defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings on plaintiffs’ claim under the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA), Ohio Re...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MELODIA PHILLIPS o/b/o T.P., a minor, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No....
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JEFFREY H. GOODE, PhD.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-929 (CKK)
JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF
CONGRESS, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STATE OF ALASKA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
and )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on Credit Nation Lending Services, LLC’s (“Credit Nation”) Notice of Appeal, (doc. I),1 from the March 19, 2012 Judgment of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Northern Division. Credit Nation requests this court to reverse the portion of the Judgment discharging appellees Louis Nettles (“Mr. Nettles”) and Lin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is presently pending before the court on defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (doc. 17),1 and its Motion to Strike, (doc. 25). Plaintiff Nancy N. Rhodes has sued her employer, defendant Tuscaloosa Board of Education, alleging that defendant discriminated against her on the basis of her association with her disabled son and that it retaliated against her for comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on several motions filed by the defendants: Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3) motions for judgment on the pleadings filed by all defendants, and Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 motions for summary judgment also filed by three of those defendants.
The plaintiff was a student in a Ph.D. program at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and became involved in a dispute over al...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This wage discrimination case' is before the court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (Dkts. 40, 42). Having considered the parties’ submissions and argument at a hearing on February 1, 2013, the motions are denied.1
Background
In February 2006, Veronica Jones, an African American, began working for Chevron Business and Real Estate Services (CBRES) as a co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Rosemary Hendry (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against her former employer, the United States Postal Service (“USPS”) (“Defendant”), by its postmaster general Patrick Donahoe,1 alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621, and the Americans with ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On October 6, 2011, Neva Day filed this action against Sears Holdings Corporation, Sears Holdings Management Corporation, Sears, Roebuck & Co., Sears Outlet Stores, LLC, and certain fictitious defendants.1 Day pled eleven causes of action: (1) gender discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”); (2) gender discr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court are Magistrate Judge Blewitt’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23) to Petitioner’s Peti*761tion for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and Respondents’ Objections to the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 24.) In the instant petition, Petitioner, a detainee of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), challenges ICE’s determin...
Views: 0
STATEMENT
I. Background
In May 2011, KZF Development (KZF) and/or Dundee Partners (Dundee) removed approximately 180 trees from a 6.8 acre residential parcel in Northbrook, Illinois (the Site). Plaintiffs Robert and Sheryl Long allege that the tree removal causes flooding, which has, among other things, damaged their home. On June 15, 2012, Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit alleging violations of the...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WANDA BUSBY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-01172 (CKK)
CAPITAL ONE, N.A., et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(March 25, 2013)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 9, 2012, Eternal Word Television Network, Inc. (“EWTN”) filed a Complaint in this court naming Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services; the United States Department of Health and Human Services; Hilda Solis, Secretary of the United States Department of Labor; the United States Department of Labor; Timothy Geithner, S...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
JOEL ROBINSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Robert L. Huggins brings claims against medical device companies Stryker Corporation and Stryker Sales Corporation (collectively, “Stryker”). Huggins alleges that pain pumps manufactured and distributed by Stryker, which a surgeon inserted into Huggins’ shoulder following surgery in February 2002, caused chondrolysis (a condition involving rapid cartilage de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This is a shareholder derivative action brought by Charlotte Kococinski on behalf of nominal party Medtronic, Inc. (“Medtronic”) against many of Medtronic’s current and former directors and officers, alleging that defendants breached fiduciary duties and violated securities laws by failing to prevent and misleadingly concealing M...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on: (1) Defendant Marc Redlich’s Motion To Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 84]; (2) defendants Steven S. Porter, Jeffrey Sperber, Alberto Bautista, Michel Darnaud, Cheryl Hoffman-Bray, and Philippe Gastone’s Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 85]; and, (3) plaintiff, Carl Genberg’s, Motion To Compel Arbitration [ECF No. 107]. For the reasons stated below: (...
Views: 1
ORDER ON PENDING DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 34), filed on June 1, 2012, and Defendant Castle Stawiarski, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 43), filed on July 5, 2012. Plaintiffs Mark and Suzanne Henson filed their Response to Bank of America’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #40) on June 29, 2012, and a Response to Defe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING FDIC’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS IN CONSOLIDATED CASES NO. 12-CY-00240, NO. 11-CV-03231, AND NO. ll-CV-03404
This matter is before the Court on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (“FDIC”) Motion to Dismiss Amended Third Amended Complaint (“Third Amended Complaint”) in Case No. 12-cv-00240 (Adams I ).1 (Doc. # 75.) Also before the Court is the FDIC’s Motion to Dismiss in the above...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This appeal from an order of the Bankruptcy Court in a Chapter 11 proceeding presents a narrow issue of the priority of postpetition fines assessed against a debt- or-in-possession. Debtors-in-possession Harold P. Munce and Munce’s Superior Petroleum Products, Inc. (collectively, “appellants” 1) argue that the Bankruptcy Court erred in concluding that nearly $200,000 in fines a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT LOCAL UNION NO. 7’S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs — five nonunion steel erectors — American Steel Erectors, Inc., Ajax Construction Company, Inc., American Aerial Services, Inc., Bedford Ironworks, Inc., and D.F.M. Industries, Inc. — allege that defendant Local Union No. 7, International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental & Reinforcing...
Views: 0
*149
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND STRIKE
I. Procedural Background
This is a common law tort action for negligence brought by Kenneth Metcalf (“Mr. Metcalf’) and Nancy Metcalf (“Mrs. Metcalf’) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) against Bay Ferries (“Defendant”) for damages resulting from severe injuries suffered by Mr. Metcalf on August 14, 2009. There is complete diversity of citizen...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION
This is an action for declaratory judgment brought by Effie Film, LLC against Gregory Murphy. Effie Film is a company formed to produce a film based on a *542screenplay, “Effie,” written by Emma Thompson1 based on the infamous, unhappy marriage of Effie Gray and John Ruskin, a highly influential Victorian-era art critic. Murphy is also the author of a screenplay, as well as a play...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On October 9, 2012, counsel for the Plaintiff Jane Devaux moved this court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) to authorize an award of attorney fees from Devaux’s past due social security disability insurance benefits in the amount of $7,919.50. For the reasons set forth below, the unopposed motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
On November 20, 2007, the Plaintiff Jane Dev...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs. Irwin and Linda Schweitzer bring the above-captioned action as representatives of the estate of their daughter Victoria Schweitzer1 (“Victoria”) and on behalf of their, granddaughter J.S., against Defendants Linda .Crofton and Suffolk County Department of Social Services (“DSS”), for claims arising out of Defendants’ temporary placement of J.S. in foster care. Pla...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ submission Regarding Scope of the Class List and Equitable Tolling, (Doc. 83), as well as Defendant’s Motion to Clarify Regarding the Scope of the Putative Class, (Doc. 84). For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs request is GRANTED in part and Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
On November 3, 2011, Plaintiffs Lee Struck (“St...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This action brings this Court into the field of reinsurance, where, according to the New York Court of Appeals, “differences have often been settled by handshakes and umpires, and pertinent precedents ... are few in number.” Sumitomo Marine & Fire Ins. Co., Ltd.-U.S. Branch v. Cologne Reinsurance Co. of Am., 75 N.Y.2d 295, 298, 552 N.Y.S.2d 891, 552 N.E.2d 139, 140 (1990). In th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, self-described “promoters of democracy in China through their writings, publications and reporting of pro-democracy events,” claim in this suit that the People’s Republic of China and Baidu.com Inc. (“Baidu”), a Chinese Internet search engine service,1 have conspired to prevent their “pro-democracy political speech” from appearing in Baidu’s search engine results. ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Gradient Enterprises, Inc. (“Gradient”), a New York corporation, commenced this patent infringement action against defendant Skype Technologies S.A. (“Skype S.A.”) and Skype, Inc., which are, respectively, a foreign corporation based in Luxembourg and a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in California.
Gradient owns U.S. Patent No....
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff filed an ERISA action seeking clarification of whether his pension plan accrued time during a six-year period. Defendants moved to dismiss because grievance procedures under the Labor Management Relations Act allegedly supersedes ' plaintiffs ERISA action. For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion is Denied.
STATEMENT
Plaintiff Ruben Size...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO TRANSFER AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (Dkt. 2, 19)
In this putative class action, Thomas Lusby (“Plaintiff’ or “Lusby”) brings a variety of state law claims against Gamestop Inc. and Gamestop Corporation (“Gamestop” or “Defendants”) for Defendants’ alleged policy of (1) requiring its overtime-e...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DECERTIFICATION OF COLLECTIVE ACTION
Plaintiffs are deputy sheriffs with the Fresno County Sheriffs Department. They pursue this collective action against the County of Fresno under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-19 (2012) (FLSA), alleging that they were not compensated for overtime required of them by the County. On August 3, 2011, the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCS. 185,192 & 194)
I. INTRODUCTION
This case concerns two varieties of table grape (i.e., grapes for fresh consumption), Autumn King and Scarlet Royal, developed and patented by the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) as a part of a program partially funded by the California Table Grape Commission (“Commission”). ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Amy Krupp filed suit against Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston pursuant to section 502(a)(1)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (ERISA), seeking recovery of long-term disability benefits and a declaratory judgment that she is entitled to ongoing benefits. Krupp and Liberty Life have filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Fo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
CONTINENTAL TRANSFERT TECHNIQUE )
LIMITED, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CHRISTOPHER SOGHOIAN )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Plaintiff Martin C. Meltzer filed the instant action on June 24, 2011. (D.I. 1). The complaint alleges that the City of Wilmington retaliated against him after he filed a charge of age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) with the Delaware Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and, later, a complaint in the Delaware Superior Court. (I...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO STRIKE
Plaintiff Chad Brazil (“Brazil”) brings this putative class action against Dole Food Company, Inc. and Dole Packaged Foods, LLC (“Dole” or “Defendants”) alleging that Defendants’ package labeling is “misbranded” because it is unlawful and misleading. Specifically, Brazil alleges the f...
Views: 0
Page 42035
ORDER
Plaintiffs Joseph and Yvette Hardesty operate Hardesty Sand and Gravel (HSG) at. the Schneider Family Mine in Sacramento County. They allege that federal, state and county agencies, prompted by a politically influential competitor, have undertaken a number of actions designed to drive HSG out of business. The following defendants have moved to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (SAC): Sac...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff filed suit in state court alleging First Amendment and whistleblower retaliation and common law tort claims arising from the termination of her employment as Deputy Police Auditor for the City of Eugene. Defendants removed the action to federal court and successfully obtained dismissal of certain claims. See doc. 13. Defendants now move for summary judgment on plaintiff...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The present case is a consolidated securities fraud class action brought on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities that purchased the publicly traded securities of Gentiva Health Services (“Gentiva”) between July 31, 2008 and October 4, 2011. Presently before the Court is the Defendants’ motion to dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, this mot...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action has been brought by Noel Padilla (“Noel”), Socorro Padilla (“Socorro”), Lourdes Padilla (“Lourdes”), Irene Santiago (“Santiago”) and Erling Johnson (“Johnson”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) against five individual officers of the Chicago Police Department — Keith Herrera, Steve Del Bosque, Margaret Hopkins, Paul Zogg and Donovan Markiewicz (each referred t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Craig Butler, filed a seven-count amended complaint against defendants, National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak (“Amtrak”), Rudy Durkovic, and Greg Avey (collectively referred to as “defendants”), alleging race discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DISTRICT HOSPITAL PARTNERS,
L.P. d/b/a GEORGE WASHINGTON
UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1717 (GK)
KATHLEEN G. SEBELIUS,
Secretary of the United
States Department of Health
and Human Servic...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
DENISE A. BANKS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 07-1807 (RWR)
)
TOM VILSACK,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. #178] AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. #185] AND DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. #181] AS TO DEFENDANT’S FIRST COUNTERCLAIM
This is an action filed against Connecticut Community Bank, N.A. (“CCB”) as *220owner of...
Views: 0
*618
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Jimmy Watson (“Watson”) and Sonja L. Taylor-Bray (“Taylor-Bray”) (together “Plaintiffs”) filed Civ. No. 10-978-LPS on November 15, 2010, alleging discrimination pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Taylor-Bray then filed a second case, Civ. No. 12-019-LPS, alleging discrimination. The cases were consolidated. Plaintiffs appear pro se and have been gra...
Views: 0
Page 42236
OPINION
This matter comes before the Court by way of Defendant Drexel HVAC, Inc.’s motion [Doc. No. 12] seeking to dismiss Counts TV, V, and VI of Plaintiffs complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The Court has considered the. parties’ submissions and decides this matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78.
For the reasons expressed below, Defendant’s motion is...
Views: 0
ORDER REVERSING DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER AND REMANDING FOR CALCULATION AND AWARD OF BENEFITS
INTRODUCTION
On November 15, 2009, plaintiff Shelley Cumella applied for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). (Administrative Record, *1122pp. 142-44).1 Plaintiff alleged a disability-onset date of September -25, 2002. Id. After denial of her application, an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) held an ...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court held a two-day bench trial in this matter on January 14 and 15, 2013. At this point, the case has been narrowed down to Evanston Insurance Company’s claim against Premium Assignment Corporation (“PAC”) for equitable subrogation. After hearing from the parties and considering their written submissions (Doc. ## 87, 88, 89), the Court finds in favor of PAC. The Court’s analysis is ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court in consideration of Defendant Balboa Insur*1314anee Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doe. # 27), filed on November 30, 2012. Plaintiffs Chris and Brandi Conyers filed a response in opposition to the Motion (Doc. #29) on December 7, 2012. Balboa filed a reply, with leave of Court, on December 14, 2012. (Doc. # 32). For the reasons that follow, the Mo...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIMS (Doc. 16)
This civil action is before the Court on Plaintiffs motion to dismiss Defendants’ counterclaims (Doc. 16) and the parties’ responsive memoranda. (Docs. 28, 29). The proposed counterclaim, which seeks to proceed as a class action, arises from events surrounding Plaintiffs filing for foreclosure due to Defendants’ defa...
Views: 0
Page 42467
ORDER
Petitioner, Thomas Dewey Pope (“Mr. Pope”), is on death row at the Union Correctional Institution in Raiford, Florida, following convictions in 1982 for first-degree murder. Mr. Pope filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody on February 19, 1999 [ECF No. 18]. On prior review, the Court issued an Order partially granting Mr. Pope’s Amended Petition wi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings (refiled with this Court as Doc. 11-1). The Court has been advised, having considered the complaint, pleadings, and applicable law. The motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED.
*550I.LEGAL STANDARD
Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(c) provides that “[ajfter the pleadings are closed&emda...
Views: 0
*862
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Before me1 is an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c) by Angela Ammons for judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for supplemental security income.2 The Commissioner has filed an answer,3 as well as a transcript of the administrative proceedings.4 Pursuant to my initial order5 and procedural...
Views: 0
*979
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Gary Hanley brings this putative class action against Green Tree Servicing, LLC, (“Green Tree”) seeking relief for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 47 U.S.C. §■ 227. (R. 1, Compl. ¶ 1.) Presently before the Court is Green Tree’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted purs...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the urgent motion for relief of judgment as null and void for lack of personal jurisdiction,1 (Docket No. 49), and the urgent motion to stay execution of judgment, (Docket No. 50), filed by defendant CommoLoCo, Inc. (“CommoLoCo”). Contending that the Court lacked personal jurisdiction over it on the basis of improper service of process, defendant CommoLoCo su...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court are the motions requesting the dismissal of the plaintiffs claims filed by co-defendants Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC-R”), as Receiver for R-G Premier Bank of *267Puerto Rico (“R-G Premier Bank”) and Scotiabank of Puerto Rico Inc. (“Scotiabank”). See Dockets No. 8-9. For the reasons set forth below,, the court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART ...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42591: El Dorado Chemical Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency
Page 42591
ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. (ECF No’s 21 & 40). Both parties ask the Court to grant judgment as matter of law upon review of an administrative decision by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”). Each party has responded to the other’s motion, and each has filed a reply. (ECF No’s 38, 42, 46, & 49). The matter is ripe for the Cou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
This action originated as a federal constitutional challenge to the partial denial of plaintiffs application for a gun license. Plaintiff Hector Pineiro applied to the Worcester Chief of Police for an unrestricted license that would allow him to carry’ a concealed weapon in public for self-defense. The police chief — who, ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On February 6, 2013, Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen filed a report under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) recommending that the Court grant in part and deny in part the defendants’ motion for summary judgment in this jail beating case. Four defendants filed timely objections, and the pla...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
This case arises out of Somali pirates’ seizure of a Marshall Island ship — which was managed by a British company and staffed by Indian sailors — in the Gulf of Aden. In the fall of 2010, pirates boarded a tanker named the MT Marida Marguerite Schiffarhrts (“Marida Marguerite”) somewhere off the coast of Yemen. The ship had set out from India for Belgium, but remain...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOHNNY L. HARRIS, j
Plaintiff, j
v. j Civil Action N0. 11-0483 (RCL)
KATHLEEN G. SEBELIUS, j
Defendant. j
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
United States Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson denied without prejudice
defendant's original motion to dismiss plaintiffs 228-page complaint and directed plaintiff,
proceeding pro se, to file an amended com...
Views: 0
ORDER At issue post-sentencing in this crack cocaine conspiracy case is the extent of the reduction in defendant’s custody sentence that is authorized pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and retroactive Amendment 750 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Defendant argues that he is entitled to a reduced custody sentence of 97 months, which results from application of two reductions below th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court are the cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. 145 and 210) of the parties to this matter, Plaintiff Brian Tech (“Plaintiff’ or “Tech”) and the United States of America. The cross-Motions have been fully briefed by the parties and are therefore ripe for our review. For the reasons that follow, we shall grant summary judgment in favor of the United *804States of Am...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER District Judge Tena Campbell referred this case to Magistrate Judge Paul M. Warner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).1 Before the court is a motion for a protective order filed by the Estates and Heirs of Robert and Katherine Prescott and the Estates and Heirs of Terry and Maryanne Taranto (collectively, “Claimants”).2 In their motion, Claimants seek a court order ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter is before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Transfer and Consolidate, which motion was filed on March 27, 2012.1 On April 17, 2012 the Response of D & L Distribution, LLC and Melvin R. Weaver & Sons, LLC to Agxplore’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer and Consolidate was filed.2
SUMMARY OF DECISION
Defendant in the within action, Agxplore Inter...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, D.C., brings this action on behalf of her son, E.B., pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 794 et seq., against the New York City Department of Education and Dennis M. Walcott in his official capacity as Chancellor of the New...
Views: 1
ORDER
The captioned case is before the court for consideration of defendant’s motion for summary judgment [41] and plaintiffs motion for summary judgment [43].1
*1230I. Factual Background2
Plaintiff Wellons, Inc. (“Wellons”) is a privately owned business in Vancouver, Washington, that manufactures and installs capital equipment for the forest product industry. (Pl.’s Facts ¶ 1.) It has between ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Hildegard Perlman (“plaintiff’ or “Hildegard”) brought this action against Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC, Fidelity Management Trust Company (collectively, “Fidelity”), Ameriprise Financial Services Inc. (“Ameriprise”), Jonathan Blass (“Blass”), as Executor and Trustee under the Last Will and Testament of Norman Perlman, and Wendy Perlman (“Wendy”) (collectively, “defendants...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for judgment on the administrative record filed by plaintiff Nicole Cultrona1 (“Mrs. Cultrona”) (Pl.’s Mot. [ECF No. 25]) and defendants Nationwide Life Insurance Company (“Nationwide Life”),2 Nationwide Death Benefit Plan *839(the “Plan”), -the Nationwide Benefits Administrative Committee (the “BAC”), and StarLine Grou...
Views: 0
ORDER
“After consideration of Plaintiffs’ Limited Objection (Docket No; 35), Defendant’s Objections (Docket No. 36) and the parties responses to their opponents objections (Docket Nos. 37 and 38) thereto, Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted.”
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
DEIN, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This action arises out of f...
Views: 0
Page 42873
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SONNIE G. BATES )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
)
SIM B. MOORE, JR., )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On May 17, 2012, plaintiff Trasteo Bank (“Trasteo”) filed this action against defendant Automated Transactions, LLC (“ATL”) seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement and invalidity of ATL’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,945,457 (“the '457 patent”); 7,571,850; 7,591,420; 7,575,158; 7,600,677; 7,699,220; 7,597,248; 7,597,251; 7,617,973; 7,621,444; 7,793,830; 7,802,718...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The plaintiff, Wendy Reichert, initiated this case in her capacity as parent of John Doe, who, while attending defendant Pathway School, was repeatedly sexually abused by an older student on school premises. Ms. Reichert brings her suit against Pathway School under a negligence cause of action. She brings her suit against Garnet Valley School District, which participated in the placem...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Michael Costa’s Motion to Remand this *457matter to New Jersey state court. For the reasons that follow, the Motion will be granted.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Michael Costa is a New Jersey resident and former employee of Defendant Verizon of New Jersey, Inc. (“Verizon”). Prior to his discharge in 2009, Cos-ta had been a Verizo...
Views: 0
Page 42924
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON COMBINED APPEAL
This matter is before the Court on Kenneth A. Rushton, the Chapter 7 Trustee’s (the “Trustee”) Appeal from Bankruptcy Adversary Proceeding No. 11-08001 in Bankruptcy Case No. 08-20105. Due to the similarity of facts and issues involved, multiple appeals to this Court were consolidated into this action.1 The Court has considered the briefs and evide...
Views: 0
Page 42975
OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of Plaintiff, Liberty Corporate Capital Limited (“Liberty”), for summary judgment [DE #37]. The motion having been fully briefed, this matter is ripe for review. Although Liberty has requested oral argument on its motion, this request will be denied, as the Court sees no need for oral argument.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case stems f...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS & MOTION TO JOIN NECESSARY PART
This is an environmental law case that arises from the chemical contamination of *1004property associated with a dry cleaning business. Plaintiffs (collectively “Coppola”) have brought suit against the City of Visalia (“the City”), and the California Water Service Company (“Cal Water”), and owners and former owners of nearby ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. 59]
This matter comes before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff Jon Pike. [Dkt. 59.] For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Mr. Pike’s Motion.
BACKGROUND AND UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS
This case involves a class action suit brought under the Electronic Funds transfer Act (“EFTA”). Pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On May 17, 2012, plaintiff John H. Stephenson (“plaintiff’) filed this patent infringement action against defendants Game Show Network, LLC (“GSN”) and WorldWinner.com, Inc. (“WW”) (collectively “defendants”). (D.I. 1) Plaintiff alleges that certain “games of skill tournaments” offered by defendants through their websites infringe his U.S. Patent No. 6,174,237 (...
Views: 0
*155RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES Following a six-day trial, the jury returned a verdict in Plaintiff Andrew Barati’s favor on his claims under the Federal Rail Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. § 20109 (“FRSA”), and the Federal Employer Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 (“FELA”) against Defendant Metro-North Railroad Company (“Metro-North”). Judgment in the amount of $20,000 on Plaintiffs FELA...
Views: 0
*356
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
This case is one of many that have arisen as a result of the collapse of Bernard L. Madoff s historic Ponzi scheme. Here, the trustees of three employee benefit plans that' invested assets in a fund that in turn invested money in Madoff-related investment vehicles, bring suit against an accounting firm. The plaintiffs allege that the accounting firm’s negligence...
Views: 1
OPINION and ORDER
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Laurine Carragher began working for defendant Indiana Toll Road Concession Company in 2007 as a toll maintenance technician. (DE #25-3 at 8, PL’s Dep. 20:21; id. at 12, PL’s Dep. 34:8.) Plaintiff believes that she was the only full-time female technician working for defendant at that time. (Id. at 19, PL’s Dep. 45:14-15; id. at 35, PL’s Dep. 71:6-7.)
De...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
-------------------------------------------------------
:
DIRECT SUPPLY, INC., : CASE NO. 1:11-CV-00683
:
Plaintiff, :
...
Views: 0
Page 43256
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
WILMINA SHIPPING AS, et al. )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-2184 (AB...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
ROGER G. CHARLES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-199 (RWR)
)
OFFICE OF TH...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
INTELSAT USA SALES CORP., :
:
Plaintiff, Counterdefendant : Civil Action No.: 10-2095 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
EMMANUEL N. LAZARIDIS, )
)
)
Plaintiff, )
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ADIRONDACK MEDICAL CENTER, et )
al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-313 (RMC)
...
Views: 1
Page 43262
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________
)
JOHN XEREAS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-456 (RWR)
)
MA...
Views: 0
Page 43263
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
FRIENDS OF THE EARTH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PAUL BEDERSON, as personal
representative of the Estate of Robert B.
Bederson,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 09-688 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
v.
UNITED STATES OF AME...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MCKESSON CORPORATION, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 82-220 (RJL)
...
Views: 0
Page 43275
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case involves the tragic suicide of a high school-aged girl who on May 18, 2010, jumped to her death from an interstate overpass. Her parents, Jill and Jim Moore, allege that Defendant Chilton County Board of Education knew about, but failed to protect their daughter from, incessant peer-on-peer bullying and disability harassment, and that the Board’s failure to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is currently before the court on defendant P.J. Cheese Inc.’s (“defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment, (doc. 43).1 Upon consideration of the record, the submissions of the parties, the arguments of counsel, and the relevant law, the court is of the opinion that defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (doc. 43), is due to be granted in part and denied in part.
I. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This controversy arises from Plaintiff Express Oil’s attempt to create a self-funded health benefits plan for its employees while eliminating any uninsured risk for itself by procuring stop-loss insurance. Express Oil employed and relied on Defendants ANB Insurance and Alan Wood to help it transition from a fully-insured to a self-funded health plan, design a suitable self-fu...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KRISTOPHER BAUMANN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-1189 (CKK)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(March 27, 2013)
...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the court upon the motion to dismiss by. defendants Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae),. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) (collectively, the Enterprises). Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, the court grants the motion. BACKGROUND Th...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are: (1) a Motion for Summary Judgment on Third Party Demand, filed by third-party plaintiffs Tetra Technologies, Inc. and Maritech Resources, Inc. (Rec. Doc. 118); and (2) Continental Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by third-party defendant Continental Insurance Company (“Continental”), seeking to dismiss Tetra’s and Maritech’s third-pa...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Rec. Doc. 10), filed by Defendants, the City of Slidell and six of its employees (collectively “the City Defendants”). Plaintiff has filed an opposition (Rec. Doc. 12), to which the City Defendants have replied. (Rec. Doc. 25) Both the Plaintiff and the City Defendants have filed supplemental memora...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
Currently pending before the Court is Defendant PHH Mortgage Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint filed on December 10, 2012. On January 11, 2013, Plaintiffs filed their Response to Defendant PHH Mortgage Corporation’s Motion t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CLAIMANTS’ MOTION TO STAY THIS ACTION AND LIFT INJUNCTION AGAINST STATE COURT PROCEEDING
I. Background
This action arises from a suit initiated by the claimants, Harry White, Jr. (“White”) and Roxanne Y. Murphy (“Murphy”), in the Circuit Court of Hancock County, West Virginia. The claimants allege in their state court proceeding that the pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Cheryl Petrone challenges the decision by the Johnson & Johnson Corporate Benefits Department to deny her claim for continued benefits under the Long Term Disability Income Plan for Choices Eligible Employees of Johnson & Johnson and Affiliated Companies (the “Plan’.’), an ERISA employee benefit plan. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants AT & T Corporation and SBC Internet Services, Inc.’s (“SBC”) motion to dismiss Counts I, II, and III of plaintiff Jack Noel’s First Amended Complaint, and for judgment on the pleadings as to Count III. Plaintiff opposes the motion and it is fully briefed. For the following reasons, the Court will construe the motion as a motion ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Defendants Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and Federal Housing Finance Agency’s (FHFA) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. #20), filed on October 11, 2012. Plaintiff Karen Nicolai filed a response in opposition to the motion on November 5, 2012. (Doc. # 31). Af...
Views: 0
Page 43736
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART W.S. DARLEY & CO. ’S RULE 12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS [15]
On March 16, 2012, plaintiff Al Maha Trading & Contracting Holding Company (“Al Maha”) filed a twelve-count complaint against defendant W.S. Darley & Co. (“Darley”), seeking damages and equitable remedies resulting from “Darley’s selection and sale of six fire trucks to Al...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
In this action, Plaintiffs Buccellati Holding Italia SPA and Buccellati, Inc. allege that Defendants Laura Buccellati LLC, Laura Buccellati, and Lilian Azel have engaged in trademark infringement, false designation of origin, trademark dilution, unfair competition, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.
Defendants have moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdic...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER The Government has filed a motion in limine (the “Motion”) related to the upcoming trial in this matter. (Dkt. No. 45.) The Government requests that the Court (1) allow it to introduce evidence of certain of defendant Christopher E. Reese’s (“Reese”) other acts under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence (“Rule 404(b)”), and (2) preclude Reese from advancing arguments r...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild move for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Defendant United States Forest Service (“Forest Service”) and defendant-intervenors Freres Lumber Company, Inc. (“Freres”) and *1273Seneca Sawmill Company (“Seneca”)1 each filed cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the parties’ motions are granted ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Edward Adedeji brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging various constitutional violations and state law claims against the City of New York (the “City”) and Police Officer John Hoder. After a three-day trial, a jury determined that Officer Hoder had used excessive force in violation of Adedeji’s Fourth Amendment rights and awarded Adedeji zero dollars...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
SC Note Acquisitions, LLC (“plaintiff’) commenced this action against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (‘Wells Fargo”), Midland Loan Services, Inc. (“Midland”), and LNR Partners, LLC (“LNR”) (collectively, “defendants”) alleging various causes of action under state law, including breach of .contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and negligence. The gravamen of...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs’1 Motion for Summary Judgment that the '720 Patent is not Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (DE 118), filed December 21, 2012, and Defendants’2 Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement (DE 122), filed under seal on December 26, 2012. The Court has reviewed the Motions, Responses, Repl...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION.
This removed case involves Plaintiff Tammy You’s claims of employment discrimination and retaliation against her former employer, Defendant Longs Drugs Stores California, LLC, and her former supervisor, Thomas McKeown. See Verified Complaint, ECF No. 6-3. You asserts that Defendants (1) discriminated against her on the basis ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Nikolas Baklous (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against Defendants AECOM USA, Inc., f/k/a DMJM+Harris, Inc., s/h/a/ DJMJM-HARRIS/AECOM (“AE-COM”) and Amtrak, alleging three causes of action for violations of N.Y. Labor Law § 240(1), N.Y. Labor Law § 241(6), and N.Y. Labor Law § 200, as well as one cause of action for common law negligence. Both AECOM and Amtrak filed cr...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) brings this civil forfeiture action to forfeit and condemn a total of $263,327.95. This matter comes before the Court on a motion to dismiss filed by Claimant Steve N. Chan (“Chan”). There was no oral argument. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78(b). For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
This is a civil forfeiture...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on motions to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) by defendants MERSCORP, Inc. (“MERS”), Litton Loan Servicing, LP (“Litton”), Johnson & Freedman, LLC, and January N. Taylor (“J & F defendants”) (DE 144, 166, 175), and the motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5) by the Bank of New York-Mellon (“BNY”) (DE 170). The magistrate judge issued mem...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I. INTRODUCTION
Pending before the court is the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 8) and brief in support (ECF No. 9) filed on May 7, 2012.by plaintiffs-American Beverage Corporation (“ABC”) and Pouch Pac Innovations, LLC (“PPi”) (collectively “plaintiffs”) ¿gainst defendants Diageo North America, Inc. and Diageo Americas Supply, Inc. (collective...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Patrick McDonough, an employee of the City of Chicago (“City”), brought suit against the City and various employees for allegedly retaliating against him for the exercise of his right to free speech. Several of his claims were dismissed, and all but one were decided for the Defendants at summary- judgment. See McDonough v. City of Chicago, No. 06 C 2732, 2...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Kofi Jamison (“Jamison”) filed a putative class action complaint against Defendants First Credit Services, Inc. (“FCS”) and American Honda Finance Corporation (“Honda”) alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227. Jamison now moves this Court to certify this ease as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule ...
Views: 0
Page 43993
*370
RULING ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE
This case is ancillary to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) enforcement proceeding against Francisco Illarramendi (“Illarramendi”) for violation of federal securities laws. The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut created a receivership estate and appointed John J. Carney (the “Receiver”) as receiver. The Re...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
NICOLAS VILLA, JR., Chief, Ione )
Band of Miwok Indians of California, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JUAN DEL CID MORALES,
Petitioner,
v. Civil Action No. 11-475 (JDB)
Criminal Action No. 06-248 (JDB)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION
CENTER,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-667 (CKK)
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
TAMMY BERGBAUER )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Clarence Mitchell (“movant”) is a federal inmate currently confined at the Federal Medical Center Devens, in Ayer, Massachusetts. Movant timely filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (D.I. 71; D.I. 77) Respondent filed an answer in opposition (D.I. 83), to which movant filed a response (D.I. 89). Movant also filed ...
Views: 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND............. 540
A. Factual Background Related to Civil Action 10-cv-4065 ...................541
B. Factual Background Related to Civil Action 10-cv-4120 ..................542
II. DISCUSSION...........................................................542
A. Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration in Civil Action 10-ev-4065 .........542
B. Plain...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. BACKGROUND
In this consolidated putative class action, currently pending before the Court are the motions of defendant Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (“Electrolux”) to dismiss the *605four plaintiffs’ complaints,1 as well as plaintiffs’ motion to appoint interim class counsel. Plaintiffs, three from New Jersey and one from New York,2 claim that the ice makers in their refrigerators, ma...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Mary J. Block brings this action against Woo Young Medical Co. Ltd. (“Woo Young”), alleging that a Woo Young pain pump that wás inserted into the. intraarticular space of her shoulder joint following surgery caused serious cartilage damage. Block brings a negligence claim against Woo Young under North Carolina law. Woo Young has moved for summary judgment an...
Views: 0
Page 44114
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ PRETRIAL MOTIONS
*1119TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1120
A. Factual Background.................................................1120
B. Procedural Background.............................................1121
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS.....................................................1123
A. Stan...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The pending motion for partial summary judgment presents the issue of tribal court jurisdiction over non-Indians who contract with a company doing business from an Indian reservation. The “pathmarking” case on tribal authority over nonmembers is Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544, 101 S.Ct. 1245, 67 L.Ed.2d 493 (1981). ...
Views: 1
Page 44166
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING KAWASAKI’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER
This case is before me on Kawasaki’s February 28, 2013, Motion To Clarify P. 52 Of Court’s Ruling On Pretrial Motions (docket no. 121). The Motion To Clarify concerns the scope of evidence and argument that Kawasaki may offer to show that an alleged “design defect” in the 2007 Ninja ZX-10R motorcycle that Scott Thompson was ri...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Lane County (“County”), Liane Richardson, Jay Bozievich, Sidney Leiken, and Faye Stewart move to dismiss plaintiffs Rob Handy’s and Brian McCall’s claims pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. Í2(b)(6). For the rea*1300sons set forth below, defendants’ motion is granted and this case is dismissed.
BACKGROUND
Prior to the initiation of this lawsuit, plain...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is an appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Georgia granting the Appellant Debtor’s motion to use SunTrust Bank’s cash collateral. (Doc. 1). The Debtor contends the Bankruptcy Court erred in the conditions it placed on his use of the cash collateral. This Court disagrees. For the reasons set forth below, the Bankruptcy Court...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to transfer venue1 (Doc. No. 35). Having fully considered the parties’ arguments, the undisputed facts, and the applicable law, the Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS this action be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
I. BACKGROUND
This litigation involves alleged patent infr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the Motions to Dismiss filed June 20, 2012 by Defendants Temple-Inland, Inc. (“Temple-Inland”), Kenneth M. Jastrow II (“Jastrow”), Kenneth R. Dubuque (“Dubuque”), Ronald D. Murff (“Murff’), and Craig E. Gifford (“Gifford”) (collectively, “Defendants”) at documents 37, 42, 44, and 47. The Motions seek dismissal of Plaintiffs Amended Class Action ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In an earlier Opinion, the motion of certain defendants for partial summary judgment was granted. U.S. S.E.C. v. Benger, 2013 WL 593952 (N.D.Ill.2013). This opinion will deal with Count V, which charges certain defendants with having acted as brokers or dealers in connection with the foreign sales of IBI stock, Benger, supra, without having been registered with the SE...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Richard Rice (“Rice”) filed this suit against Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”), ADP TotalSource, Inc. (“ADP”), and ADP TotalSource, Inc. Health and Welfare Plan (“the Plan) pursuant to Section 501(a)(1)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(1)(B). Rice alleges he was denied disability insurance benefits to whi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No....
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JACK'S CANOES & KAYAKS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 13-00130 (CKK)
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION, and
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
Page 44345
OPINION
In the instant motion for reconsideration, Defendant American National Insurance Company (“ANICO”) asks the Court to reconsider two aspects of the Court’s September 28, 2012 ruling, 893 F.Supp.2d 686 (D.N.J.2012), which were both in favor of Plaintiff Munich Reinsurance America Inc. (“Munich”). ANICO contends: (a) that the Court failed to fully consider the applicability of Article XVI of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
KAMAL K. PATEL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-cv-2307 (RLW)
REBECCA M. BLANK, Acting Secretary,
U.S. Department of Commerce, et al.,
Defendants.
M...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RANDALL TODD ROYER )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves claims of race and gender discrimination. Before the Court is Defendant Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 7) filed on August 27, 2012. In its motion, Defendant Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Booz Allen”) claims that Plaintiff Kristal Kaiser (“Plaintiff’) has failed to allege sufficient factual allegations in her Com...
Views: 0
Page 44384
OPINION
This is a consolidation of two appeals from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Kentucky (Bankruptcy Court) in relation to the approval of a settlement agreement (Settlement Agreement) between the bankruptcy trustee and a group of fifteen plaintiffs collectively referred to as the “Bennett Plaintiffs.”1 The first is the appeal of an order approving the Settlemen...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
CHRISTOPHER IHEBEREME, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil A...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
A.M., et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Ac...
Views: 1
RULING ON DEBTOR-APPELLANT’S APPEAL (DOC. NO. 1)
1
AND CREDITOR-APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE APPEAL (DOC. NO. 22)
This is an appeal from a decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut: The issue on appeal is whether the changes enacted by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”), Pub. L. No. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23, create a per se pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ POST-DEADLINE PRETRIAL MOTIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................299
A. Factual Background.................................................299
B. Procedural Background..............................................300
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS......................................................3...
Views: 1
OPINION
Currently pending before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants Bellmawr Park Mutual Housing Corporation (“Bellmawr Park”), Pat Levins, and Bob McCormick [Docket No. 31.] For the reasons that follow, the Motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This matter involves a discrimination dispute between Plaintiff Mark ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter comes before the Court by way of Defendant Lidestri Foods, Ine.’s motion [Doc. No. 21] seeking summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The Court has considered the parties’ submissions and decides this matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78.
For the reasons expressed below, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be granted.
I. JURI...
Views: 0
*588OPINION
Plaintiff Venetta N. Benjamin (‘Venetta”), individually and as achninistratix ad prosequendum of the estate of Zara Malani-Lin Abdur-Raheem (“Zara”), brings this action against the City of East Orange (or the “City”), the East Orange Police Department (“EOPD”), and Shamsiddin Abdur-Raheem (“Abdur-Raheem”), asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (or “Section 1983”) and various state l...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Annie Chatman brings suit in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 against Defendants Pfizer, Inc., Wyeth LLC, and Schwarz Pharma, Inc. N/K/A UCB, Inc., manufacturers of the brand-name drug Reglan (collectively, Brand Defendants), and Defendants Pliva, Inc., Barr Laboratories, Inc., and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., manufacturers of Reglan’s generic eq...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Motion (# 15) to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction or Alternatively to Change Venue filed by Defendants Disability Access Consultants LLC (DA Consultants LLC) and Barbara Thorpe and joined by Defendant Disability Access Corporation (DA Corporation) in its Notice (# 41) of Joinder,1 the Evidentiary Objections (#44) filed by Defend...
Views: 0
Page 44625
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiffs Motion for Remand (Dkt. 20). Defendant Gawker Media, LLC responded in opposition (Dkt. 24), and Plaintiff replied in support of the motion (Dkt. 28) after leave of court (Dkt. 27).1 Upon consideration, the motion (Dkt. 20) is GRANTED.
I. Introduction
In 2006, Terry Gene Bollea was secretly videotaped while engaged in private sexual conduct with Heather Clem ...
Views: 0
OPINION ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs Garrett and Travis Tel-fair sue their former employer, Federal Express Corporation (“FedEx”), alleging racial discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Count 1) and the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 (FCRA), Fla. Stat. § 760.01 et seq. (Count 2), and religious discrimination and failu...
Views: 0
*43
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs in this securities fraud action move to certify a class of investors in several mutual funds in the Smith Barney Family of Funds (the “Funds”). For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
I. Factual Background
Plaintiffs are investors in the Funds. (Fourth Consolidated and Amended Class Action Complaint, dated Feb. 28, 2012 (“FAC”) ¶¶...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment. (Doc. 41.) Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), Plaintiffs argue that they were entitled to overtime compensation in their positions with Defendants because they were not exempt under either the executive or administrative exemption. (Id.) As a matter of law, Plaintiffs request that the Court grant partial ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This relatively simple slip-and-fall case presents a law school examination-type question which tests the boundaries of the present sense impression and excited utterance exceptions to the general prohibition against hearsay testimony. Specifically, it examines the extent to which hearsay statements themselves ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Christina Presley, a former city police officer, brings this action against the City of Phenix City, Alabama (“City”), and City Attorney James P. Graham, Jr., alleging a First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and related state-law claims. Before the court are Defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss. (Docs. # 7, 9); Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)...
Views: 0
ORDER
On this day, the Court considered Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 29. Defendant filed the instant Motion on December 7, 2012, before Plaintiff was granted leave to file its Second Amended Complaint. See Order on Pl.’s Mot. to File a Second Am. CompL, ECF No. 43. Defendant’s Motion, therefore, addresses only those claims that were originally discernible from Plaintiffs Fir...
Views: 0
ORDER
On this day, the Court considered Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint, ECF No. 36, in the above-captioned ease. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED.
To cure potential prejudice to Defendant, however, trial in this ease will be postponed. The Court will provide the parties with the opportunity to conduct limited discovery, file dispositi...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RANDALL TODD ROYER )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Now before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment filed by the Plaintiff Alliance for the Wild Rockies (“AWR”) and the Federal Defendants. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion is denied and Defendants’ motion is granted in its entirety.1
AWR's motion for. summary judgment asserts that the Federal Defendants’ failure to address the environment impacts on the...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Fresh Del Monte Produce, Inc. (“Fresh”) has moved for a permanent injunction following a jury verdict, largely in its favor, on its breach of contract and Lanham Act claims against defendants Del Monte Corp. (“DMC”) and Del Monte Foods Co.1 The jury found that DMC had breached a trademark license agreement with Fresh by selling Del Monte-branded refrigerated fruit prod...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
David Shearon (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against his former employer, Comfort Tech Mechanical Co. (“CTM” or “Defendant”), on January 9, 2012, alleging three causes of action for disability discrimination in violation of (1) the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101; (2) the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYHRL”), N.Y. Exec. Law § 290; and (3...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Silverman Neu, LLP (“Silver-man”), as successor to Chipetine, Neu & *465Silverman, LLC (“CNS”) (“plaintiff’ or “Silverman/CNS”), brings this action against Admiral Insurance Company (“defendant” or “Admiral”) seeking a declaratory judgment that Admiral had an obligation to defend Silverman/CNS in an underlying class action lawsuit,1 instituted by class representativ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION.
In this employment discrimination case, Plaintiff Ellis Lalau is suing the City and County of Honolulu (the “City”) in connection with having been allegedly demoted, excluded from training and meetings, investigated, and placed on administrative leave from the Honolulu Liquor Commission. Lalau asser...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING IN PART, REVERSING IN PART, AND MODIFYING THE HEARINGS OFFICER’S JULY 23, 2012 DECISION Before the Court is Plaintiff Department of Education, State of Hawaii’s (“DOE” or “Plaintiff’) appeal from the Administrative Hearings Officer’s (“Hearings Officer”) July 23, 2012 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision (“Decision” 1), pursuant to the Individuals with Disabili*1025t...
Views: 0
OMNIBUS ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S POST-TRIAL MOTIONS
THIS MATTER is before me on Defendant City of Miami Beach, Florida’s Rule 50(b) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (“Motion for JNOV”) (ECF No. 173) and Defendant City of Miami Beach, Florida’s Alternative Motion for New Trial (“Motion for New Trial”) (ECF No. 178). Plaintiff Marlenis Smart filed her Response to Defendant’s Rule...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Federal Insurance Company (“Federal Insurance”), as subrogee of MonoSol Hold-co, LLC (“MonoSol”), brings this diversity action against J.K. Manufacturing Company (“J.K.”) for negligence (Count I), breach of express and implied warranties (Count II), and products liability (Count III). (R. 1, Compl. ¶¶ 15-31.) Presently before the Court is J.K’s motion to , dismiss p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Meghan Wurtz (“Wurtz”) and Mindy Burnovski (“Burnovski”) bring this class action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated (collectively, “plaintiffs”)1 against The Rawlings Company, LLC (“Rawlings”), Oxford Health Plans (NY), Inc. (“Oxford Health”), and UnitedHealth Group, Inc. (“United-*486Health”) . (collectively, “defendants”). Plaintiffs seek c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Robert Pietri proceeding pro se brings the above-captioned against Defendants New York State Office of Court Administration (“OCA”), James Imperatrice, the Chief Court Clerk of the Kings County Supreme Court, Ann Pfau, the former Chief Administrative Judge of the New York State Unified Court System, and Herbert Adlerberg, a Judicial Hearing Officer of the New York S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Cathleen Apicella (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against her employer, Rite Aid Headquarters Corp. (“Defendant”), for alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206, and New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”), N.Y. Executive Law § 296. Plaintiff asserts Defendant discriminated against...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Peter Koufos (“Koufos”) has sued U.S. Bank National Association (“U.S. Bank”), as Trustee on behalf of the holders óf the CSFB Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2005-CF1 (“Trust”), Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (“SPS”), Lender Processing Services, LPS Default Solutions, New Century Mortgage Corporation (“New Century”) and Ablitt & Scofie...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 13), Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 15), and Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 18). For the following reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 13) is *1301GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 15), and Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Ju...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Deron W. King, a former employee of Defendant Butts County, Georgia, claims that his supervisor, Defendant Van G. Whaler, discriminated against him on the basis of his race by (1) failing to promote him; (2) suspending him with pay on November 24, 2008; (3) extending his suspension with pay on December 1, 2008; (4) extending his suspens...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the motion of Defendants Alloy, Inc. and Channel One, LLC to dismiss the Complaint (“Compl.”) of Plaintiff Bais Yaakov of Spring Valley for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227, and New York General Business Law (“GBL”) '§ 396-aa.1 (Doc. 20.) For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIE...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Sebastian Rodriquez (“Rodriquez” or “Plaintiff’) brings this action claiming violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l) (“Title VII”), the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), New York Human Rights law §§ 290 et seq., New York Exec. Law § 290 and § 296 et seq., and New York Labor Law § 741. Defendants County of Nassau (“County”), Nassau County Civil S...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Dr. Maria La Russo (“Plaintiff’ or “Dr. La Russo”), as attorney-in-fact for A. Matthew De Lucia (“De Lucia”), brings this action against St. George’s University School of Medicine (“Defendant” or “St. George’s” or “School of Medicine”), alleging medical malpractice, breach of contract, and negligence. The action was removed from state court by St. George’s University...
Views: 1
OPINION
This class action is brought by participants in the Morgan Stanley 401(k) Plan (“401 (k) Plan”) and the Morgan Stanley Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”) (collectively the “Plans”) against Defendants Morgan Stanley (“Morgan Stanley” or the “Company”), Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc. (“MS & Co.”), Karen Jamesley, Morgan Stanley’s Global Director of Human Resources (“Jamesley”), John Mack,...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs, employee benefit welfare plans and employee benefit pension plans established under the Employee Retirement' Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1002 et seq., and their fiduciaries (the “Funds”), brought this action against Barile Mechanical, Inc. (“Barile”) to confirm and enforce an arbitration award pursuant to Section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relation...
Views: 0
Page 45034
*643
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Isabel Avila, brought this action to reverse a final decision of the defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”), that the plaintiff was not entitled to Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) benefits. The plaintiff filed an application for SSI benefits on July 20, 2009, alleging that her disability began on February 2, 2005. Her appli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission (FTC) brings this action against corporations and individuals for violations of § 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), and the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), 16 C.F.R. Part' 310. The FTC’s Amended Complaint names the following corporate defendants: NHS Systems, Inc.; Physician Health Service, LLC; Plus Health Savings,...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Civil Action No. 10-772 (JDB)
Criminal Action No. 07-235 (JDB)
KEVIN QUATTLEBAUM,
Defenda...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se plaintiff Cornell D.M. Judge Cornish moves for reconsideration of the August 15, 2012 memorandum opinion and order granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Cornish reargues legal arguments raised and rejected in the memorandum opinion and order, argues that he has new claims and evidence, and asserts that the court clearly erred on the facts and the law. Be...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STEVE BRATTAIN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 11-1816
v. DAR
AKIN ALCITEPE, et al.,
De...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises from alleged wrongful discharge, breach of the duty of good faith *887and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, and violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). James Newman brings these causes of action against four business entities, all of which he contends should be treated as his employers, as well as two...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this civil rights action filed by William' Pflaum (“Plaintiff’) against the Town of Stuyvesant (“Town”) and Valerie Bertram, Town Supervisor (“Bertram”) (collectively, “Defendants”), is Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), lack of personal jurisdiction purs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART SANCTIONS ON PLAINTIFFS’ FOURTH AND FIFTH MOTIONS FOR SANCTIONS
THIS MATTER comes before the Court following a hearing upon the Fourth Motion for Sanctions, filed June 4, 2012 (Doc. 306); and the Fifth Motion for Sanctions, filed June 27, 2012 (Doc. 321) filed by Plaintiff Atlas Resources, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “Atlas”) against Defendants Liberty Mut...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this diversity action, Gerald Gentile (“Gentile”), a New York citizen, as Administrator of the Estate of Diane Gentile (the “decedent”) filed suit in Massachusetts Superior Court claiming that Biogen Idee, Inc. (“Biogen”), a Massachusetts citizen, and Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Elan”), a citizen of neither New York nor Massachusetts, caused the wrongful death of the de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
This civil action is before the undersigned for all further district court proceedings, pursuant to the consent of all parties. (Docket Entry No. 54)
Plaintiffs, Richard A. Johnson and C. Dale Allen, Tennessee citizens and co-Trustees under an irrevocable trust agreement dated October 17, 1996 for the Gary D. Sasser Irrevocable Trust,1 originally *847filed this breach...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Rhonda Ivey, a former Emergency Medical Technician for McCreary County Emergency Medical Services, claims that she was sexually harassed at her workplace by Jimmy Barnett, the former Whitley City Fire Chief. She claims that she reported this harassing conduct to her supervisors at EMS and to the McCreary County Fiscal Court, but no action was taken; that is until Jimmy ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Continental Casualty Company (“Continental”) brings this action against defendant National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA (“National Union”) seeking various forms of declaratory relief. Continental seeks contribution from National Union for costs Continental incurred in defending The Valspar Corporation (“Valsp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before me is Plaintiffs1 motion, filed under seal, styled as a “Motion to Exclude Defendants’ Expert Report and Expert Testimony and Motion in Limine to Preclude Defendants, The Mountain Corporation (‘The Mountain’) and Mountain Retail, LLC (‘Mountain Retail’), from Adducing Evidence Regarding Profitability.” For the reasons and to the extent stated herein, Plaintif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
This action arises out of the termination of Plaintiff Robin Magee’s employment by the Hamline University School of Law. The matter came before United States Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan on Magee’s motion to amend her complaint. Additionally, Defendant David Titus and Defendants Trustees of the Hamline University (“Hamline”) and Donald Lewis (collectively, the “Ham...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Jean Francois Damon and Jacqueline Damon’s (the “Damons”) claims arise out of a commercial real estate purchase in 2005. The Damons’ complaint includes fifteen counts, including breach of fiduciary duties and fraud, against their real estate agents (Daniel Groteboer, Merl Groteboer, RE/MAX of Rochester, Northwest Executives Brokerage Inc. (collectively, the...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in the District of Massachusetts Jones action move to centralize this litigation in the District of Massachusetts. This litigation currently consists of eleven actions pending in seven district courts, as listed on Schedule A.1 The actions arise from injuries or deaths allegedly caused by use of GranuFlo Acid Concentrate (...
Views: 1
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs Mark S. Williams (“Williams”), Gerald Doucette, Jr. (“Doucette”), and Juan Villafane (“Villafane”) claim they were subjected to sexual abuse, harassment, and threatening conduct at the Drapelick Center, a residential re-entry work-release program located in Bloomfield Connecticut. Their Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 13), which is the operative complaint (the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 23]. The Court, having considered the motion, briefs, relevant law and being otherwise fully informed, finds that the Motion is not well-taken and will be denied.
BACKGROUND
I. The Tribally Controlled Schools Act
The Tribally Controlled Schools Act (“TCSA”), enacted in 1988, authorizes and *13...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support [Doc. 35] filed by the Board of Commissioners of Catron County, New Mexico (“Catron County”) and *1302Hugh B. McKeen and Glyn Griffin (“Third Party Defendants”); the United .States’ Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support [Doc. 37]; and the Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Cloth...
Views: 1
PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER DENYING 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255 PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND DECLINING TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Linda Kanter, Courtroom Deputy.
Proceeding pro se, federal prisoner Douglas Martin Korn (“petitioner”) filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the federal government (“respondent”) filed an answer, ...
Views: 0
order Reversing decision of THE COMMISSIONER AND REMANDING FOR CALCULATION AND AWARD OF BENEFITS '
INTRODUCTION
On May 11, 2009, Jacki Herman applied for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). (Administrative Record, pp. 150-59).1 Plaintiff alleged a disability onset date of May 1, 2004. (AR at p. 9). After denial of her application, an Administrative Law *1111Judge (“ALJ”) held an evidentiary he...
Views: 0
ORDER 1. INTRODUCTION At the close of the Government’s evidence, the Court heard argument on Defendant’s Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29 Oral Motion for Judgment of Acquittal (hereinafter “Motion”) during Defendant’s criminal bench trial for one count of Transportation of Obscene Matters in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1462 and 2. “After the government closes its evidence ..., the court on th...
Views: 0
The instant criminal action is before the Court for findings of fact and conclusions of law following a bench trial conducted Tuesday, January 12, 2010 and Wednesday, January 13, 2010, regarding the indictment.
I. BACKGROUND
On June 13, 2007, a one-count indictment was returned by the grand jury in the Albany Division of the Middle District of Georgia charging Defendant Frank Russell McCoy with a ...
Views: 0
Page 45314
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendants Mayor Charles Brown and the City of Jackson, Georgia (collectively, “Defendants”) move this ■ Court for summary judgment [Doc. 22] as to Plaintiffs Deborah and Ronald Moon’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “the Moons”) civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Georgia constitution. Having considered the relevant facts, ap...
Views: 1
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Anthony Thompson brings this action for reverse discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”). Plaintiff contends his former employer, Defendant Tyson Foods, Inc., discharged him because he is Caucasian. Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Do...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the court in the above-captioned matter are two motions for partial summary judgment, filed by defendant Motors Liquidation Company GUC Trust (formerly known as General Motors Corporation, and hereinafter referred to as “GM”) (Doc. 14), and plaintiff Callan Campbell (“Campbell”) (Doc. 11), and a motion for summary judgment (Doc. 17) filed by GM. The motions have been...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Dean Nasca (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action pro se against the County of Suffolk, Police Officer Michael Conklin, Peter Frank, William G. Ford, and John Does 1-10 (collectively “Defendants”) in connection with a series of incidents which began when Plaintiff was issued a traffic summons for failure to wear a seatbelt in violation of New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law § ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Lucienne Mohammed (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against the New York City Department of Education (“DOE”), the City of New York, and Daysi Garcia (“Defendants”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, New York Executive Law § 296 (“NYSHRL”), and New York City A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Nina Shahin (“Plaintiff’) filed this action against Defendants the State of Delaware (“the State”) and the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) (together “Defendants”) alleging employment discrimination and retaliation pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). (D.I. 2) P...
Views: 0
Page 45358
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court are the parties’ post-trial motions. Plaintiff Power Integrations, Inc. (“Power”) filed the following post-trial motions: (1) Power’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) of Invalidity of the '972 Patent, or for a New Trial (D.I. 613); (2) Power’s Motion for JMOL of Non-Infringement of the '972 Patent, or for a New Trial (D.I. 614); (3) Power...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the Court is Defendant Motorola Mobility LLC’s (“MMI” or “Defendant”) Motion for Sanctions for Plaintiff St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc.’s (“St. Clair” or “Plaintiff’) Violations of this Court’s Scheduling Order. (D.I. 40) For the reasons discussed below, the Court will grant the motion, but not award all of the relief sought.
I. BACKGROUND
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. (D.I.9) For the reasons set forth below, the Court will deny Defendants’ motion.
I. BACKGROUND
On December 30, 2011, St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. (“St. Clair” or “Plaintiff’) filed a complaint against Samsung Electronics USA, Inc. (“SE USA”). See St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. v...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is a motion to dismiss the counterclaims of Defendant Power Integrations, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Power”). (D.I. 13) The motion was filed by Plaintiffs Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and System General Corporation (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Fairchild”).
1. BACKGROUND
Fairchild filed this patent infringement action against Power on May 1, 2012....
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Benjamin Horn, has sued Defendant, the City of Mackinac Island, alleging that the City improperly interfered with his right to conduct his peddling business pursuant to his veteran’s peddler’s license. In Counts I and III of his Complaint, Horn alleges claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and retaliation in viola...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case comes before the court on several evidentiary motions filed by the parties to this dispute. Plaintiffs SMD Software, Inc. (“SMD”), and SiteLink Software, LLC (“SiteLink”) have filed motions to exclude the testimony and reports of defendants’ proffered experts Tom Litton (“Litton”) and Dr. Carson Bays (“Bays”) (DE 179, 183). Likewise defendants EMove, Inc. (“EMove”), U-Haul Interna...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are cross-motions for partial summary judgment filed by plaintiffs Peter Donatti and Matthew Cowan, and defendants Charter Communications, L.L.C., and Charter Communications, Inc. (collectively “Charter”).1 The motions ar*1040gue Charter’s Post-May 2010 Compensation Policies as they relate to the Portal-to-Portal Act, as amended by the Employee Flexibility Commuting Act (...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint, filed by Defendant, University of Notre Dame Du Lac, on June 1, 2012. (DE # 6.) For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED. The plaintiffs claims are DISMISSED with prejudice, and the clerk is ORDERED to close this case.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Amber Marie Letts Cordova (“Cor...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint, filed by Defendant, Sonoco Products Company a/k/a Sonoco Flexible Packaging Co., Inc., d/b/a “Sonoco” (“Sonoco”), on April 20, 2012. (DE # 15). For the reasons set forth below, the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THOMIKA SMITH, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 11-1112
v. DAR
IMAGINE HOPE COMMUNITY PUBLIC
CHARTER SCHOOL,
...
Views: 0
Page 45422
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALFRED M. WINDER
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 03-2623 (JDB)
LOUIS ERSTE, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Alfred M. Winder is a fo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ABOUFAZL BAYATFSHAR, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-450 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
*161
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Ryan, LLC, G. Brint Ryan, and Gerald Lee Ridgely (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action against Jacob Lew, in his official capacity as the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury,1 and against Douglas H. Shulman, in his official capacity as the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) (collectively, the “Government”). Plaintiffs challenge certain pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
In November of 2007, Thomas W. Hill and Tiffany Farmer were involved in an automobile accident on Kentucky Highway 3041 in Knox County, Kentucky. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company insures both. State Farm and Hill agree that the insurance policy puts a time limit on bringing certain legal claims. Since that time expired before the Complaint was filed in thi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO RETURN THE MINOR CHILD TO POLISH JURISDICTION (Document No. 25) Presently before the court is a dispute between David Mlynarski (“Petitioner”) and Ewa Pawezka (“Respondent”) regarding the removal of their minor son, A.M., from Poland to the United States. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 11603 of the International Child Abduction Remed...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lisa Trease brings this action against defendant Tri-State Adjustments, Inc., a debt collection agency, alleging that defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., and the Wisconsin Consumer Act (“WCA”), chapter 427, Wisconsin Statutes, by seeking interest on debts which had not been reduced to judgment. Plaintiff al...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff, Bernadine E. Matthews (“Matthews”), an African-American woman, filed this employment discrimination action against the Defendants, Waukesha County (“County”) and Debbie Rapp (“Rapp”), a human resources assistant for the County (collectively the “Defendants”). Matthews claims that she was not hired for job vacancies as an Economic Support Specialist (“ESS”) with t...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs American Atheists, Dennis Horvitz, Kenneth Bronstein, and Jane Everhart (“Plaintiffs”) bring this action against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (“Port Authority”) and the National September 11 Memorial and Museum at the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, Inc. (“Foundation”) (collectively, the “Defendants”), alleging Defendants violated the Establishment *3...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This is a putative class action brought against the Defendant Collecto Inc., d/b/a *377EOS/CCA (“Collecto”) for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (the “FDCPA”). Presently before the Court is a motion by the Plaintiff Victoria Butto, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated, for an order certifying this acti...
Views: 0
Page 45507
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an action seeking review of the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-433, 1381-1383f. This case is presently pending before the Court on the parties’ cross-Motions for Judgment on...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ANDREW HALLDORSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 06-1618 (EGS)
v. )
...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), or alternatively, Rule 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(3) (Rec. Doc. 34), Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 35), and Defendants’ Reply (Rec. Doc. 38). Defendants’ motion was set for hearing on the briefs on August 29, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. For reasons stated more fully below, the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case came before me for trial to the court from July 23 through August 2, 2012, on the claims of plaintiff, United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), for misrepresentation pursuant to section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 19331 and SEC Rule 10b-5(b)2 promulgated under section 10(b)3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as well as scheme liabi...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court presided over a trial to the court from May 14 to May 24, 2012. The trial addressed one principal issue — whether the State of Colorado’s limitation on per-signature compensation for petition circulators violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The following constitute the Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 52(a)(1) of the Feder...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by plaintiff Entek GRB, LLC (“Entek”) [Docket No. 149] and the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by defendant Stull Ranches, LLC (“Stull”) [Docket No. 146]. The Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
I. BACKGROUND1
This case arises out of a dispute regarding the rights of a mineral ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a civil rights action in which Plaintiff, John Usavage, alleges that on October 31, 2009, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PATH), the PATH Police Department, Police Officer James Sweizer, and Police Officer Michael Jones (collectively, “Defendants”) violated his state and federal rights by subjecting him to excessive force. Defendants have moved for su...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................332
II. BACKGROUND.........................................................335
III. LEGAL STANDARD FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT........................337
IV. MONELL LIABILITY...................................................337
V. DISCUSSION...........................................................339
A. Fourth Ame...
Views: 0
ORDER
(Def.’s Motion to Seal — dkt. no. 31; Def.’s Motion to Dismiss — dkt. no. 32)
I. SUMMARY
This case presents important questions concerning the application of state, federal, and foreign law to an employment dispute arising out of an American contractor’s work in Iraq. Before the Court are Defendants’ SOC LLC, SOC-SMG, Inc., and Day & Zimmerman’s Motions to Seal and to Dismiss. (Dkt. nos. 31...
Views: 1
ORDER RE BARD’S ASSERTION OF THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND WORK PRODUCT DOCTRINE AS TO FORTY-THREE JOINT SELECTION DOCUMENTS
In this order, the court will undertake a review of the assertion of the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine by Defendants C.R. Bard, Inc., and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (collectively, “Bard”) as to certain documents generated by Bard, the productio...
Views: 0
Page 45681
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [2]
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, filed on August *87829, 2012[2], For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ Motion is GRANTED.
I. Procedural Background
Plaintiffs originally filed their Complaint [1] on August 28, 2012. Their Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order [2] was filed on August 29, 2012. Defenda...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This pending motion for attorneys’ fees of intervenor plaintiff Frank Mahoney Burroughs (“Mahoney Burroughs”) follows a settlement and consent decree between the plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “Commission”), Mahoney Burroughs, and the defendants AutoZone, Inc. and AutoZoners, LLC (collectively, “AutoZone”).
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action concerns an arbitration award that this Court confirmed in January, 2012 which resulted in entry of judgment against defendant. Defendant now *59seeks imposition of sanctions against plaintiff for its conduct in attempting to execute upon its judgment and vacation of the award in its entirety.
I. Background
Defendant Kevin Sullivan was terminated from his employ at ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
In 2008, Defendants DreamWorks Animation SKG, Inc. and DreamWorks Animation LLC- (together “DreamWorks”), in collaboration with Defendant Paramount Pictures Corp., (collectively “Defendants”) released the movie Rung Fu Panda, a wildly successful animated film featuring a giant panda who becomes a kung fu warri- or. Plaintiff Jayme Gordon, an artist, claims to have cre...
Views: 0
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART ZENADOCCHIO’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD (Doc. #16); OVERRULING BAE SYSTEMS AND HARTFORD’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD (Doc. #12) AND REMANDING THE CASE FOR A FULL AND FAIR EVALUATION
This cause arises from the disability of Plaintiff Donna Zenadocchio (“Zenadocchio”). Before becoming disabled, Zenadocchio was employed by...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the court on a letter sent to chambers from “Victims: Jack Winslett and Shirley Winslett.” The court determined that the pro se letter should be treated as a Motion to Reopen the Plea under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d) and directed that the letter be filed and docketed as such. (Doc. 73). Although the letter references numerous criticisms about conversations wi...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant Seth Johnston’s Motion to Dismiss Count 1 of the Indictment for failure to charge essential elements [DE 174], The government has responded [DE 200], and Johnston timely filed a reply [DE 205]. Johnston argues that Count 1 of the Third Superseding Indictment [DE 134] (“Indictment”) fails to sufficiently charge the mens rea f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ludmila Loginovskaya (“Loginovskaya” or “Plaintiff’) brings this action pursuant to §§ 4o and 22 of the Commodity Exchange Act (the “CEA”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 6o, 25, against Defendants Oleg Batratchenko (“Batratchenko”), Tatiana Smirnova (“Smirnova”), John Does 1-20, and Thor United Corp., Thor United Corp. (Nevis), Thor Real Estate Master Fund, Ltd., Thor Asset Managem...
Views: 1
Page 45905
ORDER
This case comes before the court on the motion (D.E. 48) by plaintiffs North Carolina Right to Life Political Action Committee and North Carolina Right to Life Committee Fund for Independent Political Expenditures (“plaintiffs”), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, for the recovery of attorney’s fees and costs from defendants Larry Leake, Charles Winfree, Robert Cordle, Ronald G. Penny, and John ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Dual Groupe, LLC (“Dual Groupe”) brings this suit alleging that defendants continue to make unauthorized use of Dual Groupe’s trademark in connection with defendants’ restaurant, MPD. Dual Groupe claims that it licensed its trademark to defendants on a royalty free basis for as long as Dual Groupe was employed to manage the restaurant MPD, According to the complaint, in Januar...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court for decision are the trial record and posttrial briefing of Plaintiff Homeowners Choice, Inc. and Defendant Aon Benfield.
For the reasons stated herein, the Court finds in favor of Plaintiff Homeowners Choice Inc. and awards the sum of $744,402.06. The Court enters the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 5...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Victor M. Serby (“Piaintiff”), an attorney proceeding pro se, brought this action in the . Supreme Court of the State of New York, Kings : County, against First Alert, Inc. (“First Alert”) and its subsidiary BRK Brands, Inc. (“BRK”) (collectively “Defendants”), which then -removed the case to this Court. Plaintiff alleges Defendants manufacture, distribute, and sell various s...
Views: 0
Page 45951
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHARON SMITH,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 09-2193 (CKK)
v.
MICHAEL JAMES ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Page 45952
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
RANDOLPH S. KOCH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. ) ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
UPMC BRADDOCK, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
RANDOLPH S. KOCH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
ANDRE NOISETTE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1594 (RWR)
)
JACOB LEW, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
RANDOLPH S. KOCH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
ROSEINIA GARMANY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 10-1039 (RWR)
)
DISTRICT...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This unusual appeal arises from a dispute over whether condominium fees and assessments incurred during the pendency of a bankruptcy proceeding, after the filing of a Chapter 11 petition and prior to the case’s conversion to a Chapter 7 proceeding, are dischargeable debts. The bankruptcy court held that such fees and assessments were not dischargeable.
Appellant Amy...
Views: 5
*642OPINION
Plaintiffs, Phillip Ross (“Plaintiff’), the former Chief of Police of the Borough of Dormont, and his wife, Michelle Ross, brought this lawsuit against Defendants Borough of Dormont (“the Borough”), Gino Rizza (“Rizza”), individually and as Borough Manager, Kim Lusardi (“Lusardi”), Laurie Malka (“Malka”), Eugene Barilla (“Barilla”), Drew Lehman (“Lehman”), and Heather Schmidt (“Schmid...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHASHI GENEME,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action 10-757 (RC)
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Page 45968
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AKIACHAK NATIVE COMMUNITY,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
KENNETH SALAZAR,
Secretary of the Interior, et al.,
Civil Action 06-969 (RC)
Def...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
TRESHAWN V. JONES )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 11-2116(EGS)
v. )
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERI...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the plaintiffs’ second motion for sanctions (Docket # 62), the defendant’s opposition thereto (Docket # 74), and the parties’ respective replies (Docket # 80 & 85). After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED.1
Factual and Procedural Background
On the morning of March 6, 2010, Jet-Blue Airways Corporation’s (“JetBlue...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON ALL CLAIMS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S THREE MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Terence Ignacio was formerly a police officer on probationary status with the Big Island of Hawaii’s Police Department (the “Police Department”). Am. Compl., ECF No. 9. Ignacio is suing the Police Department and Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri in his ind...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER1
Before the Court is: (1) the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) (“Rule 12(b)(1)”)2 and 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) filed by defendants Carlos Chardon (“defendant Char-don”) and Eleuterio Alamo (“defendant Alamo”), and (2) the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) filed by defendant Edward Moreno (“defendant Moreno”), (colle...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Adaliz Sayán-Resto (“Sayán” or “plaintiff’) filed the present complaint against several defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) for violations of her rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. ECF No. I.1 Plaintiff also sought this Court’s supplemental jurisdiction over violations to Sections 1, 4, 7, and 8 of the Bill of Rights of the Constitu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court in the above entitled matter are the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and a related Motion to Strike. The parties have filed their responsive briefing and the matter is ripe for the Court’s review. Having fully reviewed the record herein, the Court finds that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on March 6, 2013. Plaintiff Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company appeared by its counsel Carl Guerrieri; plaintiff Mid-Century Insurance Company appeared by its. counsel Dean A. Alper; and defendant SimplexGrinnell LP appeared by its counsel Randall Haimovici. H...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR STRIKE (Docket No. 22)
Defendant AT & T Mobility, LLC has filed a motion to dismiss this action and to strike allegations that the complaint is brought on behalf of other unnamed individuals because Plaintiffs have not satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Plaintiffs have filed an opposition. The motion was decided on the ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________
)
CHARLES LUDLAM, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Case No. 11-1570 (EGS)
v. )
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
DEBRA AUGUSTUS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-1003 (EGS)
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MICHAEL PLUMMER,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-0969 (JDB)
SAFEWAY, INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Michael Plummer, proceeding pro se, brings this ac...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN FOREST RESOURCE
COUNCIL, CARPENTERS
INDUSTRIAL COUNCIL, and
DOUGLAS COUNTY, OREGON,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-111 (JDB)
DANIEL M. ASHE, Director, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, and KEN SALAZAR,
Se...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs Stephen Dill and Abigail Marsters bring this suit against Defendants American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. (“AHMSI”) and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“Deutsche Bank”) arising out of Plaintiffs’ home mortgage loan. Plaintiffs allege that AHMSI mishandled Plaintiffs’ loan modification application under the Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP...
Views: 1
ORDER
Pending before the Court are: (a) Dow Lohnes’ Motion For Reconsideration Of Court’s Opinion and Order (Docket No. 36), Docket No. 38; (b) Plaintiffs Response To Defendants’ “Motion For Reconsideration,” Docket No. 51, and (c) Dow Lohnes’ Reply To Plaintiffs Opposition To Motion For Reconsideration And Requesting Extension Of Time, Docket No. 56. For the reasons set forth below, the motion f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. # 22] AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. #25]
I. Introduction
The Plaintiff, Barbara Carroll (“Carroll”), brings this action against the Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Hartford”) pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S LICENSE DEFENSE
Plaintiff Realtime Data LLC, d/b/a IXO proceeded to trial against Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. claiming infringement of certain claims of United States Patent Nos. 7,161,506; 7,352,300; and 7,415,530. The jury failed to find that any asserted claim was infringed, and found that all claims were obvious. The court subsequently reversed the jury’s ver...
Views: 0
*796
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 21) .
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 21.) Plaintiff filed a Response. (ECF No. 33.) Defendants did not file a reply. The Court held a hearing on March 9, 2012. Following the hearing, the parties informed ■ the Court that there were engage...
Views: 0
Page 46295
ORDER
Plaintiffs are fourteen inmates housed in various Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC) complexes. Defendants are ADC Director Charles Ryan and ADC Division of Health Services Interim Director Richard Pratt. Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (Docs. 245, 248).1 The Court heard oral argument on Plaintiffs’ motion on January 25, 2013. For the reasons stated below...
Views: 0
Page 46333
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff David Lerner Associates, Inc. (“plaintiff’ or “DLA”) brought this action against Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company (“defendant” or “Philadelphia”) alleging breach of contract and seeking a declaratory judgment that Philadelphia is obligated to indemnify and defend DLA against claims asserted by FINRA1 and private plaintiffs.2 These complaints al*536lege that ...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs bring this class action on behalf of all persons who purchased common stock from Xerox Corporation (“Xerox”) during the period from October 22, 1998 through October 7; 1999, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). The plaintiffs bring their claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RICHARD LUBOW, et al.
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 10-0510 (JDB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
et al.
Defendants.
ORDER
On January 28, 2013, the Court reje...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 150.) This is a race discrimination in commercial lending case. Plaintiff corporations and an entrepreneur of color allege that Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (‘Wells Fargo”) engaged in race discrimination in refusing to renew and extend commercial lines of credit and loans to the Plaintiff bu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Patricia Mitchell Tracey and Larry Austin (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, sued First American Title Ins. Co. (“First American”)1 for violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1962, and other claims. For the following reasons, First American’s motion to dismiss will be denied.
I....
Views: 1
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT THREE OF AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. #128), DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE CERTAIN PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. #129) "& PLAINTIFF’S '' MOTION FOR SANCTIONS UNDER FED. R. CIV; P. 37(b) & (c) (DOC. #144)
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Teri Tucker (“Plaintiff’ or “Tucker”) has brought this action to recover damages from her former employer’s ins...
Views: 0
*1178ORDER
Pending before the Court are five motions for summary judgment: PlaintiffIntervenors’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to the Constitutionality of SB 1365 (Doc. 156), Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment re: SB 1365 (Doc. 158), Plaintiffs’ and Plaintiff-Intervenor SEIU Arizona’s Joint Motion for Partial Summary Judgment regarding SB 1363 (Doc. 160), Defendants Horne and Bennet...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
HISTORIC EASTERN PEQUOTS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 12-58 (EGS)
v. )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
THOMAS BRENNAN, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Civil Action No. 11-1448(EGS)
v. )
)
HILDA L. SOL...
Views: 0
ORDER This ease is before the Court on Plaintiff Michael Taylor’s Second Motion to Compel. (Doe. 77). Defendant Screening Reports, Inc. (“SRI”), opposes the motion. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. I am granting the motion with respect to Taylor’s discovery requests for information about consumers who have requested copies of their reports, but a...
Views: 0
*763Memorandum Opinion and Order
December 2008 was a colder-than-normal month in Chicago.1 December 22 was frigid: the high was 7°F, the low was -4°F, and 4 inches of snow sat on the ground. So conditions were ripe for a dispute between neighbors over calling “dibs” on a parking spot. Some Chicagoans believe that city tradition (or perhaps a Lockean view of the right to the fruits of one’s labor)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Timelines, Inc., filed a Complaint against Defendant, Facebook, Inc., on September 29, 2011, alleging four counts of federal and state trademark and false practices violations. Plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order to bar Defendant from offering a service on its website called “Timeline”; this motion was denied. (Dkt. No. 16.) Plaintiff amended i...
Views: 0
OPINION
Currently before the Court for disposition is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 and Western District of Pennsylvania Local Rule 56.1 (ECF No. 30). In this employment discrimination case, Plaintiff, Robert J. Wareham, asserts he was terminated by his former employer, Dollar Bank, based on his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act,...
Views: 0
OPINION
Shawn James (“plaintiff’) commenced this personal injury action seeking redress for injuries sustained when he was shot after leaving a dance on Duquesne University’s (“Duquesne” or “defendant”) campus. Presently before the court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be granted.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) provides that su...
Views: 1
ORDER
All of the Defendants, through four essentially identical motions and two joinders in previously filed motions, seek dismissal, abstention, or abatement of this action. D.E. 20, 21, 22, 30, 35, 38. Plaintiffs have responded. D.E. 32, 34, 36, 40. And one set of Defendants has replied. D.E. 37. Because the motions are the same or similar and have overlapping issues, and in the interest of j...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case challenges the jurisdiction of the United States Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (“CSB”) to investigate the release of chemicals resulting from the May 2010 explosion and fire on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico at British Petroleum’s Ma-condo well. The United States petitions to enforce subpoenas the CSB issued to Transocean Deepwater Drilli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 35) filed by Defendants The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York, as Successor Trustee to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Holders of the SAMI II Trust 2004-AR7, Mortgage Pass Through Certificates Series 2004-AR7 (“Bank of New York”), and Bank of America, N.A., as a named party and su...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Pending before the Court is Petitioner Fire and Casualty Insurance Company’s (“FCIC”)1 motion [Doc. # 106] for an order granting its motion for judgment and for contempt, based on the evidentiary record developed, and for entry of judgment against Respondent Trustmark for $9,424,337, and Respondent Trustmark Insurance Company’s (“Trustmark”) motion [Doc. # 103] to reinstate...
Views: 0
RULING AND ORDER
I.
Plaintiffs bring these consolidated actions to recover damages for sexual abuse they suffered while participating in Project Pierre Toussaint (“PPT”), a residential school for poor children in Cap-Haitien, Haiti. PPT was founded by Douglas Perlitz, who was recently sentenced to 235 months’ imprisonment based on his admitted sexual abuse of children at PPT between 1998 and 20...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 26, 2011, plaintiffs intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC (collectively “plaintiffs”) filed a complaint alleging patent infringement against defendants Sendai Nikon Corporation (“Sendai”), Nikon Imaging Japan Inc., Nikon Americas Inc., and Nikon, Inc. (D.I. 1) Sendai and Nikon Imaging Japan, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the-c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff M2M Solutions sued Defendant Micron Electronics LLC for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,583,197 and 8,094,010. Pending is Micron’s Rule *74212(b) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, insufficient service, and failure to state a claim. (D.I. 15).1 M2M argues that it has met the requirements of Rule 12(b) and at a minimum should be a...
Views: 0
*782
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this removed defamation action against a Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) employee, the Government, invoking the Westfall Act,1 has been substituted as the party defendant on the ground that the acts complained of were within the scope of the individual defendant’s FBI employment. As the substituted defendant, the Government now seeks dismissal of this action o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support, Requesting Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Entire Complaint (Doc. 18). The Court has considered the motion, briefs, and the relevant law, and being otherwise fully informed, FINDS that the motion shall be GRANT*1328ED IN PART and DENIED AS MOOT IN PART for the reasons stat...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter came before the Court on March 14, 2013 for a Hammond-Green Oil hearing regarding the singular issue of damages relating to Defendant’s Rule 50 Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (Doc. 377), Rule 59 Motion for New Trial (Doc. 378), and Motion for Remittitur (Doc. 379); Plaintiffs Response (Doc. 384); Defendant’s Reply (Doc. 390); and Plaintiffs Supplement (Doc. 393...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Exclude and Motion to Strike (Doc. 88), and Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Memoranda in Opposition (Doc. 91). The case concerns Plaintiff Glenn Smith’s products liability and breach of warranty claims against Defendant Look Cycle USA, where Plaintiff a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court are two Motions to Dismiss. Defendants United States, Secretary of the United States Senate Nancy Erickson, and Sergeant at Arms of the Senate Terrance W. Gainer move to dismiss on the grounds that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by sovereign immunity and that venue is improper in this district. Doc. No. 32. Defendant Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the United ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification [248]. Having carefully considered the motions, responses, replies, class-certification hearing testimony and exhibits, and parties’ supplementations, the Court finds that the motion for class certification [248] should be denied.
A. Factual and Procedu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Cephalon, Inc. (“Cephalon”) brings this action against The Travelers Companies; Inc. (“Travelers, Inc.”) and four of its subsidiaries, Travelers Indemnity Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, and The Standard First Insurance Company (collectively, “Travelers”), seeking a declaratory judgment that Cephalon’s off-...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Chrysler Canada, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and as Fall*1360íng Outside the Statute of Limitations and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. # 40) filed on August 22, 2012. Plaintiffs filed a response on September 5, 2012. (Doc. #45.) With leave of Court (Doc. # 54), defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTION OF DEFENDANT, TOWN OF HANSON, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY #28); MOTION OF DEFENDANTS, MICHAEL FINGLAS, SR., AND JEAN MARIE SMITH, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 30)
Pending before this court is a motion filed by defendant Town of Hanson (“the Town”) for summary judgment and a motion filed by defendants Michael Fingías, Sr. (“Fingías”) and Jean Marie Sm...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Denise Jarrett brings this class action against Defendants Panasonic Cor*1022poration of North America, Sanyo North America Corporation, Sanyo Manufacturing Corporation, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores Arkansas, L.L.C., alleging the Defendants designed, manufactured, distributed or sold defective 42" and 46" Sanyo plasma televisions. Plaintiff filed her ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Granting Petition for Attorney’s Fees, Costs and Prejudgment Interest)
THIS MATTER is before the Court on a Petition for Attorney’s Fees, Costs and Prejudgment Interest pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d), filed by Plaintiff Michael A. Bryner (“Plaintiff’ or “Bryner”) on January 10, 2013. (ECF No. 30.) This request arises from an unde...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Lawson Software, Inc.’s (“Lawson”) MOTION *451TO STRIKE EXPERT OPINIONS OF DR. KEITH UGONE (Docket No. 892). For the reasons below, the motion will be denied as to testimony about disgorgement of profits and denied as moot as to testimony about cost savings.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On January 27, 2011, following a two-week trial, a jury returned...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (Record Document 112) filed on behalf of Defendants, Louisiana Midstream Gas Services, L.L.C., Chesapeake Operating, Inc., and Chesapeake Louisiana, L.P. (collectively, “Chesapeake”).1 Plaintiffs, SGC Land, L.L.C. and Smithburg, Inc., filed a Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Record Document 113) with respect to the alle...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
This is an insurance coverage case. It stems from the Patch lawsuit in state court that involved the death of a young man who was struck by a baseball that had been batted from a metal bat manufactured by Hillerich & Bradsby Company. (“H & B”). ACE American Insurance Company insured H & B. In this lawsuit, H & B claims that ACE wrongly refused to pay further post-judgment interest...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In 2Q10, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) approved- the application of Merkos LTnyonei Ghinuch, Inc. (“Merkos”) to register a trademark for use on books and other publications distributed principally within the Lubavitcher community of Hasidic Jews. See Vaad L’Hafotzas Sichos, Inc. v. Kehot Publ’n Soc’y, 2010 WL 3597243 (TTAB Aug. 30, 2010). Vaad L’Hafo...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER
Jeffrey Levy (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the City of New York, Police Officers Sugey Castillo and Eric Travieso, and Police Sergeant Thomas Reed (“Defendants”), which arises from an incident where Plaintiff was arrested for criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree in alleged violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 265.01(2). Plaintiff seeks recovery under 42...
Views: 0
*278
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Emilie Morse (“Morse” or “plaintiff’) is a former Inflight Supervisor who worked for defendant JetBlue Airways Corporation (“JetBlue” or “defendant”) until her termination on July 8, 2006. Plaintiff filed the instant action on November 19, 2009, alleging that defendant wrongfully terminated her employment on the basis of her disability and failed to provide a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEPEN-DANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
Currently before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint, which is scheduled to be heard on March 29, 2013. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-l(b), the Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument and hereby VACATES the hearing. Having considered the pape...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises out of the termination of Plaintiff Rochelle Wynes1 (“Plaintiff’ or “Wynes”) by her former employer, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals2 (“Kaiser”).
The operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) alleges the following causes of action against Kaiser: (1) wrongful termination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”); (2) violation of American...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Thomas Cangemi, Jodi Cangemi, Mariann Coleman, Francis J. Devito, Lynn R. Devito, Leon Kircik, Elizabeth Kircik, Carol C. Lang, Terry S. Bienstock, Daniel Livingston, Victoria Livingston, Robin Racanelli, James E. Ritterhoff, Gale H. Ritterhoff1, Elise V. Thompson Trust, John Tomitz, and Thelma Weinberg as Trustee of the Thelma Weinberg revocable living trust (coll...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
This case involves a shipment of animal vaccines that allegedly froze in transit, and the contractual relationships amongst the shipper, its insurer, and the motor carrier. Plaintiff Great American Insurance Company of New York, Inc. (“Great American”), the subrogated insurer of Novartis Animal Health US, Inc. (“Novartis” or “the shipper”), brought this action’agains...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Alan J. Ross and Ruth Ross (collectively, “the Rosses”) brought this action against the defendants, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company and Deutsche Bank National Bank Company, as Indenture Trustee for New Century Home Equity Loan Trust 2005 — 4, (collectively, “Deutsche Bank”) seeking injunctive and declaratory relief in order to prevent the for...
Views: 0
Page 47058
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
Before the court are the issue of claim construction and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity for Indefiniteness filed July 9, 2012 (Doc. # 38); DDB Technologies, L.L.C.’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness filed July 20, 2012 (Doc. #45); and. Defendants’ Repl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This employment discrimination action brought by a veteran returning from service in Afghanistan and Iraq requires that the court decide whether a reasonable jury could find in his favor on claims brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (“U...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a motion for Summary Judgment jointly filed by all of the defendants (collectively “Defendants”) against each of the nine plaintiffs (collectively “Plaintiffs”) in this consolidated action. After examination of *711the briefs and the record, the Court determines that a hearing is unnecessary, as the facts and legal arguments are adequately pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Beverly Bailey (“Bailey”) brought this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461, against United of Omaha Life Insurance Company (“United of Omaha”) for denying her application for long-term disability benefits. She seeks recovery of those benefits.
Bailey, a former legal assistant, began experiencing se...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Irshad Learning Center, a Muslim religious and educational group, seeks a Conditional Use Permit to use property in unincorporated DuPage County for religious services and educational purposes. DuPage officials have denied the request. In this lawsuit, Plaintiff alleges that the denial violates its rights under the United States Constitution, the Illinois ...
Views: 0
*900
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On this day, the court considered Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation’s (“Defendant” or “Novartis”) “Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Briefing in Support” (“Motion”) [ECF. No. 32], filed March 27, 2012; Plaintiffs’ Thomas W. McKay and Leticia McKay’s (collectively “Plaintiffs” or “McKays”) “Pl...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
The Plaintiffs, Juan Signori and Gianinna P. Morzaon, have sued the present owner of their home mortgage, Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”). Fannie Mae took ownership of the Plaintiffs’ mortgage through an assignment from the initial lender. Fannie Mae arranged with Seterus, Inc. to service the Plaintiffs’ mortgage. In July 2011, t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR BREACH OF THE POLICY CONDITION PROHIBIT-. ING MISREPRESENTATION
(Dkt. No. 43)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff has sued Defendant insurer for breach of contract and violation of Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, for failing to cover losses caused by water damage to its warehouse. Defendant moved for summary judgment (Dkt. No'. 29) argui...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this diversity action, which is before me on consent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), plaintiff Julia Esmilla (“Plaintiff’) claims that her employment as the Comptroller of defendant The Cosmopolitan Club (“Defendant” or the “Club”) was terminated in retaliation for her complaints to her supervisors that, in her view, management was using, or intending to use, certain funds...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant CACI Premier Technology, Inc.’s (“CACI PT”) Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order Denying Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Based on the Statute of Limitations.1 (Dkt. No. 161.) This case concerns the well-publicized Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal. In this action, four previously detained Iraqi ci...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
ZILYEN, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0433...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this diversity suit, the parties dispute who is responsible for the extended delays that occurred during the construction of an assisted living facility in Atlantic City, New Jersey, which allegedly resulted in several million dollars in additional costs. Defendant Lindemon, Winckelmann, Deupree, Martin, Russell & Associates, P.C. (“Lindemon”) presently moves for summary judgment, asse...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case turns a page in the latest chapter in a decades-long litigation saga between the American Postal Workers’ Union (“APWU”) and the United States Postal Service (“USPS”) regarding the payments to be afforded once-terminated USPS employees who have benefitted from arbitration awards of reinstatement and full back pay. The Pittsburgh Metro Area Postal Workers’ Union and the APWU (c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In their Second Amended Complaint, plaintiffs Mike Harris and Jeff Dunstan allege, as individuals and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, that comScore, Inc. (“comScore”) improperly obtained and used personal information from their computers after they downloaded and installed eomScore’s software. (Dkt. No. 169.) They assert violations of the Sto...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
RICHARD CHEATHAM, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-94 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a products liability and negligence case in which Plaintiff, Kris Prather, alleges that a medical device, the Pain Control Infusion Pump (“PCIP”), manufactured by Defendant, B. Braun Medical, Inc., caused severe and permanent damage to her shoulder.1 The PCIP is a medical device prescribed to alleviate the pain of a post-operative patient by delivering a conti...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Carl Amato (“Plaintiff’ or “Amato”), a former Detention Officer for the City of Yonkers (the “City”), brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. *423§ 1983 against .the City and various employees of the City Police Department and the City Courts and Detention Services Division (collectively, the “Defendants”), alleging violations of Plaintiffs First, Secon...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM I.' introduction Defendant Mario Cabezas (“Cabezas”) brings a Petition for Relief [# 3] under the writs of■ coram nobis’and audita querela. Cabezas seeks to vacate his October 28, 1985 conviction for making a false statement on a passport application. Cabezas relies on the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, and argues that-his attorney’s failure to advise him of the...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY AND FOR RELIEF FROM SCHEDULING ORDER This case concerns the sale of allegedly defective watermelon seeds and the statutory prerequisite(s) to filing a legal action pursuant to section 578.26, Florida Statutes. Plaintiff TRA Farms, Inc (“TRA”) owns and farms land in Calhoun County, Florida. ECF No. 1, Ex. A. Defendant Syngenta Seeds, Inc. (“Syngenta”) breeds, develops...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the township defendants’ (the Office of the Jackson Township Trustee, the Jackson Township Advisory Board, and Jackson Township) motion for summary judgment (DE # 34) and the Jackson Township Volunteer Fire Corporation of DeKalb County’s motion for summary judgment (DE #36). For the reasons set forth below, those motions are granted in part, ...
Views: 0
Page 47981
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S AND THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Minnesota Pipe & Equipment, Co. (“MN Pipe”) brought this negligent misrepresentation action against defendant Ameron International Corporation (“Ameron”). Ameron, in turn, filed a third-party complaint against Snyder & Associates, Inc. (“Snyder”) for professional negligence, negligent mi...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order
Capitol Records, LLC (“Capitol”), the recording label for such classic vinyls as *645Frank Sinatra’s “Come Fly With Me” and The Beatles’ ‘Yellow Submarine,” brings this action against ReDigi Inc. (“ReDigi”), a twenty-first century technology company that touts itself as a “virtual” marketplace for “pre-owned” digital music. What has ensued in a fundamental clash over culture,...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Rachel Kannaday’s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 21). For the reasons set forth below, Ms. Kannaday’s Motion to Compel is hereby granted.
I. Procedural Conference Requirement
Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(1) and D. Kan. Rule 37.2 require a moving party, in good faith, to confer with opposing counsel about any discovery disputes before filin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON DISCOVERY DISPUTE
On January 28, 2013, 2013 WL 358266, I resolved a previous discovery dispute between the, parties by ruling, -in relevant part, that the federal psychotherapist-patient privilege applies in this case. See ECF No. 25. The parties now dispute the scope of that privilege. Treating the new dispute as a motion by the defendant to compel the producti...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order
Plaintiff, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), brings this action against Defendants Richard F. Syron, Patricia L. Cook, and Donald J. Bisenius (collectively, “Defendants”), former senior executives of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), for violations of anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws. The SEC’s claims arise from...
Views: 0
Page 48236
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
To Magistrate Judge Dein’s extremely thorough Report, there is little that I can add. Consequently, her Recommendation is ADOPTED and the petition is DISMISSED.1 Of the eight issues pressed before the Magistrate Judge, the most emphasis is given to the failure of the trial court to give a so-called Bowden instruction. See Commonwealth v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is an action brought pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C, § 405(g), to review a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying Plaintiffs claim for a period of disability and Disability Insurance Benefits under Title II of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 401 et seq.
Under the Social Security Act, a claimant may be considered disabled...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Anna-Marie Thomas (“Plaintiff’), a teacher employed by defendant New York City Department of Education (the “DOE”), brings this action against the DOE; its former Chancellor, Joel I. Klein; and four individuals who, at certain times relevant to this action, worked with Plaintiff at the Brooklyn High School of the Arts (collectively, the “BHSA Defendants”). Plainti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In November 2009, Plaintiff Josefina Cruz (“Plaintiff’ or “Cruz”) and four other tenured New York City public school teachers who had been removed from the classroom and subjected to disciplinary procedures by the New York City Department of Education (the “DOE”) commenced this action, alleging various federal constitutional violations. Thereafter, the DOE and the four indi...
Views: 0
Page 48372
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In 2008, Dr. Habib Sadid, then a tenured professor at Idaho State University (“ISU”), sued Arthur Vailas, the university’s president, and Richard Jacobsen, the dean of the College of Engineering, in Idaho state court for retaliating against him for publicly criticizing their job performances. Approximately six weeks before the state court granted summary...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
The Court has before it Defendant St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center, Ltd.’s (“St. Luke’s”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended- Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (Dkt. No. 29) and Plaintiff Patrick A. Zoellner, M.D.’s (“Dr. Zoellner”) Motion to Strike Portion of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (Dkt. 35). Having ful...
Views: 0
ORDER
Almost ten years ago, a district judge observed the following regarding Brenda C. Armstead:
Armstead is no stranger to federal civil litigation. She has filed at least 45 complaints in various district courts across the country. She has also filed over 30 lawsuits in the Florida courts, prompting the Florida Supreme Court *908to sanction her in 2002. Several federal courts have either san...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Aegis Defense Services LLC’s (“Defendant” or “Aegis”) Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings or, in the Alternative, to Dismiss Counts I, III, IV, V, and VI of Plaintiffs’ Complaint and Strike Plaintiffs’ Jury Demand (the “Motion”). [Dkt. 14.] For the following reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s Motion.
I. Backgro...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Carol Trachtenberg brings this action against the Department of Education of the City of New York and the City School District of the City of New York (the “BOE”),1 claiming that BOE employees subjected her to disparate treatment and a hostile work environment on account of her age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq. (“AD...
Views: 3
OPINION
Wilmington Trust Company, solely in its capacity as collateral trustee (the “Collateral Trustee”) with respect to certain 7.5% Senior Secured Notes Due 2016 (the “Senior Secured Notes”) issued by appellee American Airlines, Inc. (“American”), and guaranteed by appellee AMR Corporation (“AMR”), and U.S. Bank National Association, solely in its capacity as indenture trustee (the “Indentur...
Views: 0
Page 48424
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff ORIX Capital Markets (“ORIX”) brought suit against defendants Cadlerocks Centennial Drive, LLC (“Cadlerocks”) and Daniel Cadle (“Cadle”) for breach of a promissory note, a Guaranty and an Environmental Indemnity Agreement.
I. Background
After a three day bench trial this Court found Cadle liable pursuant to the Guaranty and Environmental Indemnity Agreement and awarde...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION On April 16, 2007, plaintiff filed applications for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income, alleging disability beginning June 1, 2003, due to degenerative disc disease, diabetes, hypertension, and depression. (Tr. 17, 101-11, 119-20). The Commissioner denied those applications on August 9, 2007. (Tr. 17, 48-56). Thereafter, the plaintiff...
Views: 1
Page 48435
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs National Integrated Group Pension Plan (the “Plan”) and the Board or Trustees of the Plan filed the above-captioned action pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) to collect a sum of withdrawal liability against Defendants Dunhill Food Equipment (“Dunhill”), Esquire Mechanical (“Esquire”), Geoffrey Thaw, Sanford Associates (“Sanford”) and ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter is before the court on Defendant Metropolitan Edison Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed July 27, 2012.
SUMMARY OF DECISION
For the reasons expressed below, I grant Defendant Metropolitan Edison Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment and dismiss plaintiffs claims asserted against defendant Metropolitan Edison Co. (“MetEd”).
Specifically, I conclude that the applicab...
Views: 0
FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendant The Government Of Belize’s Motion To Dismiss The Complaint (DE 20). The Court has carefully reviewed said Motion, the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
Introduction
Plaintiff GDG Acquisitions LLC (“GDG”) is a Florida limited liability company with its place of business in Leon County, Flori...
Views: 0
ORDER RE MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court are (1) Plaintiff National Bank of California’s (“the Bank”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Defendant Progressive Casualty Insurance Company’s (“Progressive”) Fifth Affirmative Defense (Doc. No. 22); (2) the *922Bank’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to the Issue of Cessation and Progressive’s Third and Eighth Affirm...
Views: 0
Page 48517
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART AAIC’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON HUDSON’S COUNTERCLAIMS
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Partial Summary Judgment on Hudson’s Counterclaims filed by Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant American Alternative Insurance Corporation.
After considering all papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motions...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before me on defendants’ motion (Doc. No. 21) to strike portions of plaintiffs summary judgment appendix. Plaintiff has filed a resistance (Doe. No. 27) and defendants have filed a reply (Doc. No. 29). No party has requested oral argument and, in any event, I find that oral argument is not necessary. See Local Rule 7(c). The motion is fully submitted.
*158
BACKGROUND
Plaintif...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
On March 15, 2013, the Court heard argument on defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. Having carefully considered the arguments of counsel and the papers submitted, the motion is DENIED, for the reasons set forth below.
BACKGROUND
Defendants hired plaintiffs to provide counseling to military service members and their families. Plaintiffs, ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AND THIRD AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
This lawsuit arises out of a dispute between plaintiffs Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle International Corporation and their long-time partner, CedarCrestone, Inc., concerning CedarCrestone’s conduct in providing support services for Oracle’s PeopleSoft-branded software. Oracle brought this action for copyr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
Former Clinton County property owner Tom Fortunatas (“Fortunatas”) initiated this action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated when Defendant Clinton County acquired his property through a tax foreclosure but would not consider reconveyance of his property after the date of redemption as it had done for another taxpaye...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 16), as well as Defendants Chung’s Products, LP, Charlie A. Kujawa, and Gregory S. Birdsell’s response (Doc. 30), the Government’s reply (Doc. 34), Defendants’ surreply (Doc. 38), the Government’s response thereto (Doc. 41), Defendants’ supplemental declaration (Doc. 47), and the Government’s respon...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Keepers, Inc. (“Keepers”) is a Connecticut corporation operating a cabaret-style nightclub in Milford. The establishment features live clothed and semi-nude dancing for adult patrons. Plaintiff After Dark LLC (“After Dark”) does business as Romantix Adult Emporium, a retail adult entertainment establishment that sells, exhibits, and distributes e...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court are two Motions for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendants, Bristol, Inc. d/b/a Emerson Process Management and/or d/b/a Remote Automated Solutions, 'Inc. (“Emerson”), Irene Bielen (“Bielen”), and Craig Rossman (“Rossman”) (collectively “Defendants”). Also before the Court is a Motion to Amend or Substitute Response (“Motion to Amend”), filed by Lana Anderson (“Plainti...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
JULIE GOLDBERG-BOTVIN, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION
Plaintiff Larry Pavao brought this action against Defendants Law Offices of Kenosian & Miele, LLP, and Unifund CCR Partners, a New York Partnership, alleg*1241ing violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the “Rosen...
Views: 0
Page 48865
ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is Defendants Western Support Group, Inc., Douglas C. Harmon, and Cynthia A. Harmon’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 34). The Court now rules on this motion for summary judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
In the summary judgment context, the Court construes all disputed facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Ellison v. Robertson, 357 F.3d 1072,1...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Certify Conditionally Collective Action and Class Action (Doc. 50).
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Defendant Factor Sales operates grocery stores under the names King Market, Factor Warehouse, and Del Sol. At least one named Plaintiff worked in each of these stores. Plaintiffs were cashiers at the stores between 2008 and 2012. As cashiers, ...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on plaintiff, Randall C. Mustain-Wood’s, review of defendant, Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company’s (“Northwestern”) denial of disability benefits to Mustain-Wood. For the reasons stated below, I REVERSE Northwestern’s decision to deny Mustain-Wood’s long-term disability claim (“LTD claim”) and REMAND the case to Northwestern for the sole and limited p...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
A. Factual Background
This case arises out of a fire that occurred in a FEMA trailer. On August 25, 2006, a flash fire broke out in Jean Joseph’s newly leased FEMA trailer while Ms. Joseph and her friend, Bernard Mabry II, were inside, resulting in severe injuries to Ms. Joseph and the death of Mr. Mabry. Multiple lawsuits were filed in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Gregory Skillman (“Skillman”) was convicted by a jury on August 3, 2007 of Felon in Possession of Firearm and Ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On November 30, 2007, the Court sentenced him to 110 months imprisonment and a 3-year term of supervised release. Skillman appealed his conviction but it was upheld in June, 2009. On September 15, 2010, Skillman filed th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, complain that defendant, their union, failed to represent them when they were terminated. Defendant moves for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiffs’ complaint is time-barred. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion will be allowed and the plaintiffs’ ease will be dismissed.
I. Factual Background
Defendant Unite Here! Local 26 (“L...
Views: 0
ORDER
On January 18, 2012, the Honorable Gabriel W. Gorenstein, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation .(“Report”) in the above-captioned matter recommending that the Court grant in part and deny in part the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Officer Matthew Regina, the New York City Police Department, and the City of New York. In particular, Judge Goren...
Views: 0
Page 48988
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Wing F. Chau and Harding Advisory LLC commenced this action against Defendants Michael Lewis, Steven Eisman, and W.W. Norton & Company, alleging that Defendants committed libel by publishing twenty-six defamatory statements about Plaintiffs in Lewis’s 2010 book, The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine. Plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a case brought pursuant to this court’s diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiffs are Spencer Lader (“Lader”), who is a principle of Plaintiff Spendan Sports, LLC. (“Spendan”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”). Defendant is Carlos Delgado (“Delgado” or “Defendant”), a former professional baseball player who played, at one time, for the New York Mets. Presently before the court i...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (Doc. # 10) filed on November 27, 2012. Defendants filed an Opposition (Doc. # 21) on December 14, 2012. Plaintiff asserts that the case must be remanded to state court because the Notice of Removal was untimely filed. Defendants respond to the contrary. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that the Noti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Information Expert, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “IE”) Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 52], Plaintiff Cyberlock Consulting, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff’ or “Cyberlock”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Dkt. 64], and IE’s Motion to Strike Alleged Facts and Evidence Supporting Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (the “Motion to Str...
Views: 0
*757
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant CitiMortgage, Ine. (“Citi”) and Defendant Shapiro Brown & Alt (“SBA”) filed Motions to Dismiss and accompanying Memoranda in Support on February 13, 2013, and February 15, 2013, respectively. On February 22, 2013, the Plaintiff, Norma Rehbein (“Rehbein”), filed a Motion to Remand to State Court and an accompanying Memorandum in Support. These Motions ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION ' TO COMPEL
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Compel Settlement Check. [D.E. 110]. We have carefully considered the motion, Defendant’s Response in Opposition [D.E. 114], and Plaintiffs reply thereto [D.E. 115], plus the record in this case. We no longer have *1338subject matter jurisdiction to grant any relief on Plaintiffs motion to compel. Acco...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDG- ■ MENT IN PART [577] AND DENYING DC’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [588]
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 17, 2012, 2012 WL 4936588, this Court ruled in Plaintiff DC Comics’ favor on its first and third claims for declaratory relief, effectively nullifying the termination notices Joe Shuster’s heirs had filed and served on DC. While that order is pendi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 114), Defendant’s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiffs’ Evidence in Opposition to Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 131), Defendant’s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiffs’ Declarations Submitted in Support of Their Motion for Class Certification (Dkt. No. 106), Plaintiffs’ Motion to ...
Views: 0
Page 49199
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Plaintiffs are husband and wife. Martha lives in the United States, and Jorge lives in Mexico. Jorge applied for a visa to move to the United States and made it as far as an interview with a consular officer in Ciudad Juarez. His application was denied, however, because a 1974 conviction in the United States for drug trafficking gave t...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING BANKRUPTCY COURT’S ORDER
This is an appeal by Debtors/Appellants, Gary D. and Brenda K. Hauck (collective*210ly, “the Haucks”), of the January 13, 2012 Order of the Bankruptcy Court in Adversary Proceeding No. 10-01888. (Doc. # 13-1 at 202-221.) In that Order, the Bankruptcy Court considered whether it was required to except from discharge the Haucks’ debt to Appellee Stephanie M....
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant Google, Inc. (Google) moves for coordinated or consoli*1382dated pretrial proceedings in the Northern District of California. This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in five districts as listed on Schedule A. Plaintiffs in the two actions pending in the Northern District of California and the action pending...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANTHONY GHAFFARI,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-115 (JEB)
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se Plaintiff Anthony Ghaffari has file...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DAVID M. DRISCOLL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-690 (ESH)
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Opinion
Lead Plaintiff Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana (“TRSL”) brings this action on behalf of a putative class of investors (“Plaintiffs”) who purchased or acquired Pfizer stock between October 31, 2000, and October 19, 2005 (the “Class Period”), against Pfizer and corporate officers Henry McKinnell, John LaMattina, Karen Katen, Joseph Feczko, and Gail Cawkwell (together, the “Indivi...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendants1 in three actions seek centralization of eight actions involving numerous related patents owned by patentholder Automated Transactions LLC (ATL) in the District of Delaware. The patents at issue, U.S. Patent No. 6,945,457 ('457 patent) and 12 patents that have issued as continuations of the '457 patent, are generally direc...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in 21 actions pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania move for centralization of this litigation in that district. The litigation encompasses the 27 actions listed on Schedule A.1
All responding plaintiffs, with the exception of plaintiff in the Southern District of Mississippi Coleman action, support centralizati...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant Philips Electronics North America Corporation (Philips) moves for centralization of this litigation in the Central District of California.1 The litigation encompasses the ten actions listed on Schedules A and B.2 All ten actions involve alleged infringement of the 5,560,-360 (’360) patent, which relates to the imaging of ner...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs bring this action alleging Betty Phelps was injured after ingesting a generic version of the prescription drug metoclopramide manufactured by Pliva from 2004 through 2007. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that Pliva was negligent by failing to adequately warn Mrs. Phelps of the dangers of using metoclopramide and by failing to update its product label in 2003 and 2004...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Otis Henry’s objections ' [41] to Magistrate Judge Alan J. Baverman’s Report and Recommendation (the “R & R”) [699], which recommends that Henry’s motions to suppress evidence from 1855 8th Street, Chamblee, Georgia [513 & 521] and to suppress identifications [509, 552 & 573] be denied; his motion to suppress statements [507] be granted in part...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, John T. McMahan and Northwestern Nasal and Sinus Associates (“NNASA”), filed an eight-count complaint against Deutsche Bank AG (“DB”), Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. (“DBSI”) (collectively, the “Deutsche Bank Defendants”), Robert Goldstein, and American Express Tax and Business Services (“AMEX”) (collectively, the “AMEX Defendants”). Plaintiffs’ complain...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
EDITH M. BUDIK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
RULING AND ORDER
Dina Jaeger brought this action to enjoin the March 12, 2009 decision and order of the Connecticut Siting Council (“Council”) granting Célico Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (“Célico”) a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need (“Certificate”) for the construction, maintenance, and operation of a wireless telecommunication facility (“Tower”) at 188 Route 7,...
Views: 0
ORDER Presently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. See Dkt. No. 44. Upon due consideration, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This action is predicated on the tragic death of Plaintiffs daughter, Kara Thompson (“Thompson”). See Dkt. No. 1. Specifically, Thompson succumbed to necrotizing tracheobroncitis and pneumonia whil...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Factual Background and Procedural History.727
II. Standing.731
A. Constitutional Standing.731
B. Prudential Standing.733
C. In Pan Delicto Defense .735
III. The Motion to Strike .739
A. Standard of Law Under Rule 12(f) .740
B. Discussion of the Motion to Strike.740
IV. The Motion to Dismiss.743
A. Standard of Law Under Rule 12(b)(6).743
B. Discussion of th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Hilda L. Solis, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor (“the Secretary”) brings this action against SCA Restaurant Corporation, d/b/a Luigi Q Italian Restaurant (“SCA Restaurant Corp.”) and Luigi Quarta (“Quarta”) (collectively, “defendants”), asserting claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq. Specifically, the Secr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This qui tam action brought by Relator Marc Osheroff attacks certain inducements offered by medical clinics to Medicare beneficiaries in the Miami area. Defendants HealthSpring, Inc., HealthSpring of Florida, Inc., Leon Medical Centers, Inc., and Benjamin Leon, Jr., have filed Motions to Dismiss (Docket Nos. 56 & 57). Those Motions have been fully briefed by the parties, and the Cour...
Views: 6
ORDER on Pending Motions for Partial Summary Judgment
This case was originally filed in Mesa County District Court (case number 2011 CV4746). [Docket # 1]. Defendants removed the case to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). Id. This comes before the Court on defendant Allstate’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [# 40]; defendant Na...
Views: 0
SUMMARY ORDER The plaintiff, proceeding pseudonymously on behalf of her minor son, “A.D.,” has brought a medical malpractice claim against several providers who, she alleges, negligently failed to diagnose him with a brain tumor. Though the tumor was eventually identified and removed, the plaintiff alleges that, by that point, it “had grown substantially in size from the time it should have firs...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Shannon Fusco’s Dispositive Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 17), filed on March 13, 2013, and Defendant Desoto County School Board’s Dispositive Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 25), filed on March 18, 2013. Plaintiff filed a Memorandum in Opposition (Docs.# 44, 45) to each motion on March 29, 2013. I. Plaintiff Amber Hatcher (plaintiff or Hat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. OVERVIEW
Plan B and Plan B One-Step are emergency contraceptives that can be taken to reduce the risk of pregnancy after unprotected intercourse. In 1999, Plan B became the first emergency contraceptive drug approved for prescription-only use in the United States. In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved non-prescription access to Plan B for women 18 and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Before the court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment arguing that Plaintiff, a public school physical education teacher, is not entitled to First Améndment protection for his speech concerning the condition of a gymnasium. Also before the court is a portion of Plaintiffs motion to amend his Complaint seeking to add three forms of allegedly protected speech and numerous a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action is a reminder of the adage that “people who accept an offer assume the risk of unread terms that may prove unwelcome.” Schnabel v. Trilegiant Corp., 697 F.3d 110, 123 (2d Cir.2012) (quotation omitted). Plaintiffs Dollar Phone Corp. (“Dollar Phone”) and parent company Global Switching, Inc. (“Global Switching,” collectively “plaintiffs”) bring this class action on ...
Views: 1
Following the jury’s award of $28.4 million, Laidlaw moves for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, and to amend the judgment. When jury instructions were settled, I submitted the full panoply of damage instructions with the caveat that I would consider the consequential damages argument anew, if it appeared such damages were part of the verdict. A *1041hearing was held on the pending motions...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Kathy Rodríguez-Vives brings the suit against her employer, Puerto Rico Firefighter Corps of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, under Title-VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981 et seq. Plaintiff alleges sexual discrimination as well as retaliation for filing a complaint, which resulted in a settlement agreement in the case of Rodriguez Nieves v. Commonwe...
Views: 0
*163ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Gwendolyn Gavin brought this employment discrimination action against defendant Hilton Worldwide, Inc. (“Hilton”) pursuant to federal and state laws. See Doe. No. 1, Ex. A. Gavin alleges that starting in June 2010, Hilton failed to reasonably accommodate her chronic, severe depression and that Hilton wrongf...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. Criminal Case No. 07-007 (GK)
ANDRE DREW, o
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant has filed a Motion, Pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 2255, to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct
Sentence [Dkt. No. 82]. Upon consideration of the Motion, the Govemment's Opposition [Dkt. No.
85], Defendant's Reply [Dkt. No. 87], and the en...
Views: 0
*1181MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the Court on a joint motion to dismiss filed by Petitioner Rock Springs Grazing Association (RSGA) and Respondents (collectively BLM) pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) and the terms of the Consent Decree and Joint Stipulation for Dismissal (Consent Decree). Document (Doc.) No. 81; 81-1. For backg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
. The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brought this civil enforcement action against defendants Joshua Constantin, Brian Solomon, and Windham Securities, Inc.,1 alleging that the defendant broker-dealers misled clients about their professional experience and qualifications, misappropriated client funds, and knowingly prepared false account statements to cover up the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Putt-Putt, LLC (“PutL-Putt”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendant 416 Constant Friendship, LLC (“416 CF”). Doc. No. 12. The Court has reviewed the parties’ briefs and accompanying exhibits and concludes that no hearing is necessary. See Loe. R. 105.6 (D.Md. 2011). For the reasons articulated below, the Court will GRANT Plaintif...
Views: 0
Page 49834
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs (or “Funds”) bring this action against a number of named Defendants in the above-referenced matter. Defendants Joseph Olivieri (“Olivieri”), EMB Contracting Corp., Michael Batalias, and Elisavet Batalias (collectively, “EMB”), and Michael Brennan (“Brennan”) have each moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint [dkt. no. 30 (“Complaint” or “Compl.”) ] purs...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Edwin Toledo-Colon (“Plaintiff’) brought this action against the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (“the Commonwealth”), the Puerto Rico Department of Labor and Human Resources (“DOL”), the Puerto Rico Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the Vocational Rehabilitation Administration (“VRA”), and individual defendants in their personal and official capacities. (See Docket No. 1.) ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF LIONEL ROGERS’ FEE APPLICATION (DOCKET ENTRY #56); PLAINTIFF LIONEL ROGERS’ SUPPLEMENTAL FEE APPLICATION (DOCKET ENTRY # 78); PLAINTIFF LIONEL ROGERS’ SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL FEE APPLICATION (DOCKET ENTRY # 83) .
Pending before this court is a motion for attorneys’ fees filed by plaintiff Lionel *357Rogers (“plaintiff’) and two supplemental motions to recover reason...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action reviews the decision of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, dated September 11, 2012, as issued by the Administrator of CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services). That decision followed the July 12, 2012 remand of the case to the agency by this court (doc. no. 40). It affirmed the May 17, 2010 determination by CMS, which ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JACK'S CANOES & KAYAKS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 13-00130 (CKK)
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, and
NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM O...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Abstention and Remand [DN 21]. Also before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Enlargement of Page Limit for their Reply [DN 35]. Fully briefed, this matter is ripe for decision. For the following reasons, the motions are GRANTED.
I. Background
In August of 2004, Eastern Livestock Co., LLC (“Eastern Livestock...
Views: 1
Page 50002
ORDER This matter is before the court upon the motion for summary judgment by defendants.1 Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, the court grants the motion in part. BACKGROUND This excessive-force case arises out of the arrest of plaintiff Isaac Ward on De: cember 3, 2009. Although he maintains a separate residence from his wife, Randee Ward,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM1 TABLE OP CONTENTS I. BACKGROUND.........................................................542 II. DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION TO LIMIT THE SCOPE OF ■ RETRIAL............................................................543 *542A. Constructive Amendment ............................ 544 1. Legal Standard.................................. 544 2. Bribery Theory of Honest-Services Fraud.......... ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs claims (docket entry 4). For the' reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
A. 'Factual Background
This case arises from a pending mortgage foreclosure. In March 2003, the plaintiff Enacia J. Lewis (“Lewis”) obtained a mortgage loan of $200,000.00 from World Savings Bank, FSB (‘Wor...
Views: 0
Page 50112
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
UNITE HERE Local 1 (the “Union”), which represents many employees of Chi*865cago’s Congress Plaza Hotel (the “Hotel”), is nearly a decade into a strike that began in June 2003. This lawsuit addresses a portion of that labor dispute. The Hotel complains that union members used unlawful methods to persuade Hotel customers to express solidarity with the Union by taking...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TRITA PARSI and NATIONAL
IRANIAN AMERICAN COUNCIL,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 08-705 (JDB)
SEID HASSAN DAIOLESLAM,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Before th...
Views: 0
Page 50184
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
LINWOOD A. WILLIAMS, JR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 08-1538 (RWR)
)
COURT SERVICES...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY
I. Background
Plaintiff Wilson Gorrell (“Plaintiff’) filed a motion to compel discovery on February 11, 2013, seeking “to obtain complete answers to the discovery requests” pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 33). On February 27, 2013, Defendants filed their...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF DETENTION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) Jerry Correia (“Correia” or “the defendant”) appeared on March 13, 15 and 18, 2013 with counsel for a detention hearing. He is charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine base, cocaine, oxycodone and marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The purpose of a detention hearing is as stated in the statute — i.e., “... to determin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court upon an appeal from Bankruptcy Court. The Appellant argues that the Bankruptcy Court erred when it held that 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(4) did not apply to oil and gas leases and allowed certain oil and gas leases to be sold as property of the estate. Appellee, Robert W. Leasure, in his capacity as Trustee, has made a motion to dismiss the app...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Apeldyn Corporation has sued Defendant Eidos, LLC, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief relating to the enforceability of the 2008 Patent Agreement (“Patent Agreement”) entered into between the parties and alleging breach of contract relating to a separate agreement between the parties. Dkt. 3. Eidos counterclaimed for breach of the Patent Agreement and for fraud;...
Views: 0
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, and to Strike Certain Allegations Therein (Dkt. 66), to which the Receiver has responded in opposition (Dkt. 68). Upon consideration, the motion (Dkt. 66) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
Arthur Nadel orchestrated a massive Ponzi scheme for ten years before he ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”) [Dkt. No. 3], in which plaintiff seeks to hold the defendant, who is an attorney, liable for misrepresentations the defendant allegedly made over three years ago during civil litigation that the plaintiff filed in this Court. For the reasons stated in open court and more fully...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Presently before the Court are Defendant 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Committee’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 20), Defendant Carol Aichele’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35), and Plaintiffs Joe Garcia, Fernando Quiles, and Dalia Rivera Matias’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 19). For the following reasons, Defendants’ Motions will be granted and Plaintiffs’ Motion will ...
Views: 0
ORDER:
(1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT UPS-SUPPLY CHAIN SOLUTIONS, INC.’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
(2) DENYING PLAINTIFF ROHR, INC.’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
(3) DENYING DEFENDANT KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION, INC.’S RENEWED MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This action arises out of two international shipments of cargo between Italy and Southern California....
Views: 0
RULING
This lawsuit was brought by Plaintiff John R. Tribble (“Tribble”) against Defendant the Ouachita Parish Police Jury (“OPPJ”). Tribble raises various federal and state law claims asserting that he was wrongfully terminated because of his disability.
Pending before the Court is the OPPJ’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 15]. For the following reasons, the OPPJ’s Motion for Summary Judg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Optical Communications Group, Inc. (“OCG” or “plaintiff’) filed this admi*452ralty and maritime action against cargo vessel M/V AMBASSADOR (the “Vessel”) and its owner, Marbulk Canada Inc. (collectively, “defendants”), after the Vessel’s anchor struck and damaged plaintiffs fiber optic submarine telecommunications cable. We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuan...
Views: 0
Page 50553
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Lead plaintiffs Danske Invest Management A/S and Pension Funds of Local No. One, I.A.T.S.E. (collectively, “Lead Plaintiffs”), as well as additional plaintiff Pompano Beach General Retirement System (together with Lead Plaintiffs, “Plaintiffs”), bring this putative class action on *365behalf of themselves and others similarly situated (the “Class”) against Long...
Views: 1
ORDER The Court has scheduled a status conference in this case for Friday, April 5, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., in response to an order entered by a United States District Judge in the Southern District of Georgia (sometimes referred to in this order as “the *1295Georgia court”) granting Defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and directing that he be returned ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On June 22, 2012, Defendants Urban Outfitters, Inc.; UO.com, L.L.C.; Urban Outfitters Wholesale, Inc.; Anthropologie, Inc.; Antrhopologie.com, L.L.C.; Free People of PA, L.L.C.; and Freepeople.com, L.L.C. (collectively “Defendants”) filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint and Memorandum in Support (Doc. 33). Plaintiffs The Navajo Nation, the Diñé Development...
Views: 0
Page 50560
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This habeas petition arises out of petitioner’s conviction for unlawful possession of ammunition without a firearms identification card on June 18, 2008, in Massachusetts Superior Court.
I. State court proceedings
On November 27, 2007, Alexis Ayala (“Ayala”) was indicted for unlawful possession of ammunition without a firearms identification card (Count 7). The grand jury also ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
LEONIDAS EMERSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 13-241 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
Page 50597
OPINION ON PARTIAL DISMISSAL While confined in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional Institutions Division, plaintiff filed the pending civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants City of Houston Police Officers Ted Adams, Anthony Hawkins, and Jeffrey Oliver violated the Fourth Amendment by using excessive force to arrest him. (Docket Entry No. 1). Af...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (D.E. 10) .
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Celebrity Cruises, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 9, 7/11/12) and Motion for Sanctions (D.E-. 10, 7/11/12). Plaintiffs filed Responses to each Motion (D.E. 13, D.E. 8/9/12; D.E. 14, 8/9/12) and Defendant filed Replies (D.E. 15, 8/14/12; D.E. 16, 8/14/12...
Views: 0
*659
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in Rushing v. Ambest, Inc., No. 06-7621-PJH (N.D.Cal.), Lerner v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 07-1216-GHK-FMO (C.D.Cal.), and Wyatt v. B.P. America Corp., No. 07-1754-BTM-JMA (S.D.Cal.), bring class action claims for damages and injunctive relief against defendants which own, operate or control gas stations in California. Plaintiffs claim that because defend...
Views: 1
ORDER
Pursuant to the District Court’s Standing Order of Reference filed February 20, 2013 (Doc. 28), Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 21), Plaintiffs Motion to Compel (Doc. 26), and Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Appendix to Reply Brief (Doc. 33) have been referred to this Court for determination. For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant’s Motion for Protectiv...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE
On April 5, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion to Transfer Venue to the District of New Jersey filed by Defendant Derma Sciences, Inc. (“Derma Sciences”). (Doc. #15 (“Mot.”).) Saul Perloff, Esq., Katharyn A. Grant, Esq., and Bob Rouder, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Healthpoint Ltd., d/b/a Health-point Biotherapeutics (“H...
Views: 0
*739 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action was filed on March 20, 2011, by plaintiff/counter-defendant Better Bags, Inc. (“BBI”), against defendants/counter-plaintiffs Illinois Tool Works, Inc. (“ITW”), Fantapak International Corp. (“Fantapak”), and Inteplast Group, Ltd. (“Inteplast”) for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 7,134,788, entitled “Resealabl...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JARROD BECK, KEERTHI REDDY, and
ERIN GALLOWAY,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 04-1391 (JDB)
TEST MASTERS EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Judgment and For Leave to File [Proposed] Second Amended Complaint. (D.I. 33) For the reasons set forth below, the Court will deny Plaintiffs motion.
I. BACKGROUND
On July 8, 2010, Lead Plaintiff Bradd Gold (“Gold” or “Plaintiff’) filed suit against Defendants Ford Motor Company and Ford Motor Company Capital Tr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Golden Bridge Technology, Inc. (“GBT”) filed this action against Apple, Inc. (“Apple”), three AT & T entities,1 and Motorola Mobility LLC, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,574,267 Cl (“the '267 patent”), as reexamined, and 7,359,427 (“the '427 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”). (D.I. I)2 GBT has asserted the same patents-in-suit...
Views: 0
Page 50781
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ALAN SCOTT, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Following the Court’s March 28, 2012 ruling (D.I. 13), 2012 WL 1134730, Plaintiff, JAM Transportation, Inc. (“JAM” or “Plaintiff’), filed an Amended Complaint (D.I. 14). Thereafter, Defendant Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company (“Harleysville” or “Defendant”) moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint. (D.I. 15) For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s motion to dismiss (D.I....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Cellectis S.A. (“Cellectis”) filed the present action against defendant Precision Biosciences, Inc. (“Precision”) on March 1, 2011, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,897,372 (“the '372 patent”), which is assigned to Cellectis. (D.I. 1) Precision answered the complaint on March 23, 2011 and counterclaimed against Cellectis for non-infringement ...
Views: 0
ORDER
The plaintiff, Jean Hackensmith, filed this action against the defendants, Port City Steamship Holding Company (the “Holding Company”) and Port City Steamship Services, Inc. (“Steamship Services”), on August 1, 2012. (Docket # 1). Ms. Hackensmith’s filing of this action followed the Holding Company’s earlier filing of an admiralty limitation of liability complaint in the separate but relate...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs are a class of prisoners with serious mental disorders confined in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). In 1995, this court found defendants in violation of their Eighth Amendment obligation to provide class members with access to adequate mental health care. Coleman v. Wilson, 912 F.Supp. 1282 (E.D.Cal.1995). To remedy the gross systemic failur...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case arises from a dispute between an insurance company and the owners of a property as to whether an insurance agreement covers arsenic damage to the property. On December 11, 2011, the Association of Apartment Owners of Imperial Plaza (“Plaintiff’ or “Imperial Plaza”) filed a Complaint asking for declaratory relief that Firem...
Views: 0
ORDER
This dispute, now in its second decade, pertains to the latest attempt by plaintiffs, Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and Fidelity Express Network, Inc. (“Fidelity”), to enforce a judgment. Fidelity obtained that judgment which, with interest, now totals over $10 million dollars, against defendants Colin H. Friedman, Hedy Kramer Friedman, Farid Meshkatai, and Anita Kramer Meshkatai1 follo...
Views: 0
Page 50992
OPINION
Defendants Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., Goldman Sachs Canada Credit Partners Co., Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, and Goldman Sachs Lending Partners LLC (the “Goldman Lenders” or the “Defendants”), have moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure to dismiss the Amended Complaint (the “AC”) of plaintiffs Cap-mark Financial Group Inc. (“CFGI”), Summit Crest...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER By indictment filed December 1, 2011, Isfrain Jose Serrano (“Defendant”) is charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and possession with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Defendant moves this Court pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3) and (41)(h) to suppress ev...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order
Plaintiffs1 bring this suit against a collection of corporate and individual Defendants, alleging violations of §§ 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 77k, 77Z(a)(2) & 77o, and New York common law in connection with the sale of a number of residential mortgage-backed securities. Before the Court are four separate motions to ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM
Before the Court in this patent infringement case are cross motions: Plaintiffs motion to dismiss Defendants’ counterclaim for breach of contract on the ground that Defendants lack standing to pursue it; and Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, on the ground that they are third pa...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This suit arises out of the death of Daniel Wultz and the injuries of Yekutiel Wultz, ■ suffered in a 2006 suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, Israel. Four members of the Wultz family brought suit against Bank of China (“BOC”), alleging acts of international terrorism and aiding and abetting international terrorism under the Antiter-rorism Act (“ATA”), among other claim...
Views: 0
Page 51216
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Timbisha Shoshone Tribe (“Tribe”), Joseph Kennedy, Angela Boland, Grace Goad, Erick Mason, Hillary Frank, Madeline Esteves and Pauline Esteves filed their Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) in this action on May 29, 2012, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendants United States Department of the Interior (“DOI”), Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”), Donald La...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Richard Hershey (“Hershey”) brings this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various officials and administrators of Lehman College (“Lehman”), the Chancellor and Chief Executive Officer of the City University of New York (“CUNY”), and a collection of CUNY Public Safety officers (collectively, “defendants”), alleging that defendants violated his rights under the Unit...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This case involves a lawsuit by a legal secretary, Valerie Medcalf, against the law firm partner for whom she worked, George J. Walsh III, and the partner’s wife, Evelyn Walsh. Medcalfs claims arise out of her discovery of emails between the Walshes commenting upon her, which in turn touched off a series of events that led the law firm, Thomson Hiñe LLP (“TH”), to terminate her....
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendations of the Special Master, filed on November 11, 2011, regarding an invoice dispute between Diagnostic Consultants, LLC (“DiCon”) and defendants, the District of Columbia Public Schools (“DCPS”) and the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (“OSSE”).1 On December 5, 2011, DCPS filed objections to certain po...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
NILS RAFAEL PINTO, et al., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING CWA’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION [# 28], DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT [# 42] AND DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
I. INTRODUCTION
On June 6, 2012, Plaintiff, David Scott, filed the instant action pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. seeking recovery of ap...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER David S. Detweiler recently filed another in an apparently never ending series of motions. Detweiler seeks relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). He claims that his lawyer misadvised him regarding a plea offer and that error caused Detweiler to go to trial with the result that he had to serve a longer prison sentence. I will deny the motion. Represented by one of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................835
A. Factual Background.................................................835
B. Procedural Background..............................................838
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS.........................................................
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Document 11), memorandum in support (Document 12), and enclosed exhibits. Upon careful consideration of the motion, the memoranda in support and in opposition, *584the reply, and the entire record, the Court finds, for the reasons stated herein, that Defendant’s motion should be granted.
I. BACKGROUND
P...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
OUACHITA RIVERKEEPER, INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
THOMAS P. BOSTICK, Lieutenant General,
U.S. Army Chief of Engineers and Civil Action No. 12-803 (CKK)
Commanding General of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, et al.,
Defendants,
EL DORA...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Wyandotte Nation, a federally recognized Indian tribe (“the Nation”), filed this lawsuit against Kenneth Salazar, Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior (“the Secretary”), seeking an order from this Court compelling the Secretary to accept title to certain land and hold it in trust for the Nation’s benefit, as specifically required by Public Law...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO FED. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) This action arises out of an escalating polemic between two bloggers who have diametrically opposed views on the safety and virtues of home birthing. Plaintiff Amy Tuteur, a resident of Massachusetts, is a former physician and critic of midwifery. Tuteur authors several blogs, including The Skeptical OB. Def...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS The parties consented to proceed before the assigned Magistrate Judge. Rec. doc. 30. There are three pending motions: (1) the motion of the defendants, Empty Barge Lines, Inc. (“EBL”), Higman Barge Lines, Inc. (“HBL”) and Higman Marine Services, Inc. (“Higman Marine”), for partial summary judgment (Rec. doc. 57); (2) the motion of HBL and Higman Marine for partial summary judgm...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER AMENDED VERSION1
Plaintiffs John Doe, Jane Doe, and Jack Doe (“Plaintiffs”), residents of New York, bring this action against Defendants Delaware State Police (“DSP”) and Seaford Police Department (“Seaford PD”) (collectively “Defendants”) asserting common law claims of “negligence per se,” “gross and wanton negligence,” and “loss of reputation, companionship and services.” (Ver...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Eli Lilly and Company’s (“Defendant”) motion for summary judgment and supporting memorandum.1 After considering the motion, response, record, and controlling authorities, the Court GRANTS the motion its entirety.
1. Background
Jiea M. Rutland-Simpson (“Plaintiff’) alleges in her first amended complaint that while she was employed by Defendant, she w...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11–2096 (RC)
:
v. : Re Document No.: 21
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
IVY SPORTS MEDICINE, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-cv-1006 (RLW)
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This liti...
Views: 0
*68MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Christine Caluyo (“Plaintiff’) brings the above-captioned action against Defendants DaVita, Inc. and DaVita Rx, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) asserting one count of negligence against each defendant in connection with an injury suffered by Plaintiff while she was receiving dialysis treatments. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ employee negligently...
Views: 0
ORDER
The matter before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint, filed by Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America”). (ECF No. 3).
I. Background
On November 8, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in San Diego County Superior Court. (ECF No. 1-1). The Complaint states: “This action arises out of Defendant Bank of America’s unlawful foreclosure proceedings against Plaintiffs ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This Order addresses two motions: (1) a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants JPMorgan Cháse Bank, N.A., individually and as successor-in-interest to Washington Mutual Bank, F.A. (“JPMC”); Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”); and MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. (collectively the “MSJ Defendants”) [60]; and (2) Defendant CTX Mortgage Company, LLC’s (“CTX”) mo*854tion ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MICHAEL AKOSILE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-173 (R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has been asked to consider three motions filed by Defendants, all of which involve the confidentiality of benthic macroinvertebrate surveys performed by or at the request of Defendants for their internal use. (ECF Nos. 31, 33, 34). Plaintiffs responded to the motions, and Defendants replied. (ECF Nos. 39, 40). On March 26, 2013, the undersigned heard argum...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORB>ER
This Memorandum Opinion construes the disputed claim terms in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,882,771 (“the '771 Patent”), 7,116,-862 (“the '862 Patent”), 7,339,714 (“the '714 Patent”), 6,856,459 (“the ''459 Patent”),. and 6,940,647 .(“the '647 Patent”). Additionally, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness (Docket No. 205) is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
The Plaintiff Ch...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (2) DENYING PLAIN- ‘ TIFF’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (S) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS/CONTEMPT; AND (I) DENYING DEFENDANT’S ■■ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
On April 2, 2013, the Court heard Defendant Diane Bennett’s Motion for Summary *700Judgment (doc. # 41) and Plaintiff American Registry of • Radiologic Technologists’ ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
DEBORAH D. PETERSON, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this bankruptcy appeal, appellant and adversary defendant Thomas Scott Jenkins (“Jenkins”) seeks review of the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment to appellee and adversary plaintiff, IBD, Inc. (“IBD”). For the reasons set forth below, the bankruptcy court’s order is reversed and the matter is remanded to the bankr...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
BARBARA NICHOLS, )
)
Plaintiff, pro se )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
SANDRA COMPTON, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 13-262 (RMC...
Views: 0
FIE..E§
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA N>R 1 j 'I!H:§
) Cterk, U.S. Disérictrt'a$r)d
B nkru tcy ou
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) a p
)
v. )
) Criminal No. 07-307
KEVlN D. AYERS, )
)
Defendant. )
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is defendant Kevin D. Ayers's pro se Motion [44] to Vacate, Set iAside,
or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Defendant's Mot...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR CONTEMPT (Dkt. No. 205)
I. INTRODUCTION
This case originally arose out of a private commercial dispute between the par*210ties. Over the last month, however, the case has turned into a challenge to the very foundation of the rule of law. Defendants Wolfgang Neuberger, Biolitec AG (“BAG”), and Biomed Technology Holdings, Ltd. (“Biomed...
Views: 8
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON UNUM GROUP AND PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT
Plaintiffs Unum Group and Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company (collectively, Unum) brought this action primarily seeking the reimbursement of advance commissions paid to The Benefit Partnership, Inc. (Benefit Partnership) and Michael P. Ippolito in connection with the soli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant Peoples Bank to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs Rooster’s Grill, Inc., RK Foods, LLC, Reginald Kelly and Angela Kelly have responded to the motion and the court, having considered the memoranda of authorities submitted by the parties, concludes the motion ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this civil action brought pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 145, plaintiff Disney Enterprises, Inc. (“Disney”) seeks a judgment that it is entitled to a reissue of U.S. Patent No. 5,963,915 (“the '915 patent”) covering the pending claims in United States Reissue Patent Application 09/970,-772 (“the '772 application”), all of which were rejected as obvious by the United States Patent...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This employment discrimination case is before the Court to determine whether attorney Christina A. Agola should be sanctioned under Rule 11(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for making misleading representations to a Magistrate Judge. The circumstances are unlike any that have arisen during my nearly 25 years as a United States District Court Judge.
In connection wi...
Views: 1
Page 52432
ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(Re: Docket No. 28, 32)
Plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club bring their claims for declaratory and injunctive relief under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701-706. They challenge the decision of Defendants Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to sell four oil and gas leases for approxim...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 21] filed by defendant Spec Pro, Inc. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
I. BACKGROUND
Spec Pro is a corporation that contracts with the United States government to provide mail services to Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Plaintiff Tonya Dunlap worked for Spec Pro as a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO MODIFY DESEGREGATION PLAN
Presently before the Court is a motion to modify desegregation plan [10] filed by the Defendant, Choctaw County School District. Upon due consideration, the Court is ready to rule.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
Choctaw County School District (the “District”) serves all students in Ch...
Views: 0
*481
OPINION AND ORDER
Appellant Pal Family Trust brings this appeal of the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of its Chapter 7 case. For the reasons that follow, the Court affirms the bankruptcy court decision.
I. Background
Following more than a year of proceedings, on August 20, 2012, the bankruptcy court dismissed Appellant’s Chapter 7 ease citing Appellant’s failure to comply with its obligati...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This action was originally filed by Plaintiffs A.B. and L.B. in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, see Feinberg Decl. (Docket # 70) Ex. A, and was subsequently transferred to the Southern District of New York by order dated April 29, 2008. See Feinberg Decl. Ex. B. The action was originally brought against Defendants Mark Staropoli, Paula Staropo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND TO STRIKE
Plaintiff Beth A. Rhodes brought this action against Sutter Health, Sutter Gould Medical Foundation (“SGMF”), and The Gould Medical Group, Inc. (“GMG”) alleging unlawful retaliation, constructive discharge, gender harassment, gender discrimination, failure to prevent discrimination, violation of California Business and Professi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The appellant, Ruth E. Rodriguez-Borges (“Borges”), a creditor in her ex-husband Manuel A. Domenech-Rodriguez’s (“Domenech”) Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding, appeals from two bankruptcy court’s orders dated January 12, 2012, 2012 WL 112971. In the first, an opinion and order entered in Adversary Proceeding No. 11-00168, the Bankruptcy Court granted the Chapter 7 Trustee Wigberto...
Views: 3
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in one action moves for centralization of this litigation in the Western District of North Carolina. This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in two districts, as listed on Schedule A. Since the filing of the motion, the parties have notified the Panel of 14 related actions pending in various federal distri...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant American Home Realty Network, Inc., moves for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of California. This litigation currently consists of two actions pending in two districts, as listed on Schedule A.1 The responding parties oppose centralization.2 In the alternative, plaintiff in the District o...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in one action move for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of Ohio. This litigation against Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., currently consists of eight actions pending in eight districts, as listed on Schedules A and B. The cases in this litigation primarily involve injuries allegedly caused ...
Views: 0
Page 52569
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (DuPont) moves to centralize this litigation in the Southern District of Ohio or, alternatively, in the Southern District of West Virginia. This litigation currently consists of twenty-six actions pending in the Southern District of Ohio and the Southern District of West Virginia, as list...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (Doc. 9), filed September 4, 2012; Supplemental Complaint for Declaratory Relief (Doc. 13), filed by Plaintiffs on February 14, 2013; and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave (Doc. 15), filed April 8, . 2013. After carefully reviewing the motions, briefing, plead...
Views: 0
*522
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this case seeking judicial review of denial of Social Security benefits, Plaintiff Frances Noe Kettering has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #11] (“Plaintiffs Motion”). Defendant Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, also filed a Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 12] (“Defendant’s Motion”) and a Brief in Support [Doc. # 13] (“Defendant’s Br...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Motion for Class Certification [ECF No. 53], filed by Plaintiff Stephen Manno. For the reasons explained below, the Court finds that class certification is appropriate.
Introduction
Plaintiff Stephen Manno brought this putative class action against Defendant Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group, LLC (“HRRG”) for alleg...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the court on defendants’' motion to suppress (DE 36). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. entered memorandum and recommendation (“M & R”) wherein he recommends that the court grant in part and deny in part defendants’ motion to suppress. Defendants timely filed objections to the M & R, and the government did not res...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This is a breach of contract case involving two commercial entities, Rexnord Industries, LLC (“Rexnord”) and Bigge Power Constructors (“Bigge”). Bigge manufactures and sells cranes and similar equipment for use in heavy industry. In 2009, Bigge agreed to supply a company named Shaw Constructors, Inc. (“Shaw”) with two large derricks, which Shaw intended to use to construct nu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Michael O’Leary (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the City of New York (the “City”), the District Attorney of Queens County (the “District Attorney”), and New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) Officer Benjamin Colobong (“Officer Colobong”) (collectively “Defendants”), alleging that Defendant violated his civil rights by arresting and prosecuting him for driving...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 101]. The Court, having considered the motion, briefs, relevant law, and being otherwise fully informed, finds that the Motion is well-taken and will be granted.
*1206
BACKGROUND
Defendant PAMF Excavation, LLC' (“PAMF”) is a Washington limited liability company in the business of harv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration and for Leave to File Revised Amended Complaint [Doc. 97] and Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Complaint [Doc. 150]. The Court, having considered the motions, briefs, relevant law, and being otherwise fully informed, finds that the Motion for Reconsideration and for Leave to F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 15]. The Court, having considered the motion, briefs, relevant law and being otherwise fully informed, finds that the Motion is well-taken and will be granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Complaint for Damages (“Complaint”) arises out of his purchase of a used vehicle from Defendant Pitre, Inc. (“Pit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support [Doc. 32], The Court, having considered the motion, briefs, relevant law, and being otherwise fully informed, finds that the Motion is well-taken and will be granted.
*1215
BACKGROUND
On October 24, 2010, Plaintiff Brian Stevens entered the Home Depot retail sto...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant and Cross-Claimant Federal *1220Insurance Company’s (“Federal”) Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 2, 2012 (Doc. 70)1. At the heart of the Plaintiffs’ cause of action is the issue whether a commercial insurance policy that Federal issued to Plaintiff Western Heritage Bank’s (“Bank”)2, obligated Federal to provide...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
We consider here a motion by St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital (“St. Jude”) to dismiss Count I of the complaint filed by the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania (“Penn” or “the University”), a Count which alleges tortious interference *235with contractual relations.1 St. Jude argues first that the claim is barred by the Noert'-Pennington doctrine, and that,...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Columbus Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center, which participates as a healthcare provider in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, filed this suit against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) in her offi*808cial capacity. Doc. 1. The suit alleges that the Secretary violated Columbus Park’s Fifth Amendment due process rights by afford...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 51)
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Otis Elevator Company’s (“Otis”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 54.) Plaintiffs filed a response (ECF No. 67) and Otis filed a reply (ECF No. 89). The Court held a hearing on February 7, 2013. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Otis’s motion. INTRODUC...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. move for summary judgment on all of plaintiffs claims (Docket 149) and also move to exclude the testimony of four of plaintiffs experts (Dockets 140, 143, 145, and 147). Defendant Luzenac America, Inc. joins in the motions (Dockets 151,153, 155, 156, and 157). For the following reasons, defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF REMAND
Table of Contents
I. Introduction.............................................................422
II. Facts and Procedural History..............................................423
A. T.L.’s Background and Education......................................423
B. May 2011 IEP Meeting and Placement Offer ............................424
C. IHO Proceedings ..................
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Norberto Colon-Lorenzana and Gladys Goza-Gonzalez (collectively “Plaintiffs”) bring this trademark action against South American Restaurants Corporation and various unknown defendants (collectively “Defendants”) claiming Norberto invented the “Pechu Sandwich.” (Docket No. 1.) While still in its nascent stages, Defendants move to dismiss the complaint due to Plaintiffs’ failure ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
We must decide whether a covered medical provider violates the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (“EMTALA”) when its medical personnel fail to diagnose a patient’s potential emergency condition, but treats the symptoms identified and concludes that the patient has been stabilized.
I.
Factual and Procedural History
On June 23, 2010, Awilda Ramos-Ortiz visited t...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Magda I. Alvarez (“Plaintiff’) sues the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, Eric K. Shinseki (“Defendant”), in his official capacity for allegedly violating the Age Discrimination Employment Act (“ADEA”). Plaintiff seeks $400,000 in compensatory and punitive damages, and other forms of relief found in the complaint. (Docket No. 1 at 4.) Defendant moved for summary ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Carlos R. De La Rosa Medina (“Plaintiff’) brings claims against his former employer, Pan Pepin, Inc. (“Defendant”), for discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et. seq., and various causes of action under Puerto Rico law. Defendant moved to dismiss at Docket No. 9 and Plaintiff opposed at Docket No. 14. For the following...
Views: 0
Amended Memorandum Opinion
In this diversity action, Plaintiff Donald Hoffman seeks recovery because he purchased a recreational vehicle (“RV”) that he insists is a “lemon.” The RV Hoffman purchased was manufactured by Thor Motor Coach and sold by Camping World. Daimler Trucks provided the chassis1 for the RV and Drew Industries2 supplied *351certain components. Hoffman alleges that the RV is d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
For the following reasons, defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted; plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied.
I. The Complaint
Plaintiff-lessor Karl Markowicz (“Karl” or, where unambiguous, “Markowicz”) asks this Court to void a lease under which defendants-lessees, SWEPI LP (“SWEPI”) and Ultra Resources, Inc. (“Ultra”), are permitted to explore and exploit Markowicz...
Views: 0
ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................881
II. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND..............................881
A. Underlying Case ....................................................881
B. Ancillary Proceedings ...............................................882
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW................................................883
IV. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Herbert S. Moncier, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Defendants: State of Tennessee and Nancy S. Jones, chief disciplinary counsel of the Board of Professional Responsibility. Plaintiffs claims arise out of his disciplinary proceeding before a hearing panel of the Board of Professional Responsibility. On June 1, 2011, the Tennessee Supreme Court issued an...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has responded, and the matter is ripe for ruling. For the reasons discussed below, defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.
BACKGROUND
The facts as alleged in plaintiffs complaint are as follows. In November 2007, plaintiff was hired by defendant as a teaching assistant at Clayton High School. When she was fil...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (DE IS)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Motion to Compel Production of Documents (DE 15) filed by Plaintiff, Angela Maharaj (“Plaintiff’). This matter was referred to the undersigned by United States District Judge Kenneth A. Marra upon an Order referring all discovery to the undersigned for ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is “Defendant’s Motion to Examine Plaintiff,” (Dkt. No. 15), filed March 4, 2013. Therein, Defendant, Southern Tire Mart, LLC, “asks the Court to order Plaintiff to submit to physical and mental examinations with Defendant’s experts, as authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35.” (Id. at 1). More specifically, “Defendant proposes that Dr. Grego...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
INTRODUCTION
In this false-advertising action, plaintiffs assert that defendants’ advertisements misrepresent the nature of defendants’ páté. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is Granted in part and Denied in part.
STATEMENT
Plaintiffs Animal Legal Defense Fund, a California nonprofit'corporation, and ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Orchard Supply Hardware (“Plaintiff’) brings a Complaint (“the Complaint”) against Defendants Home Depot USA, Inc., (“Home Depot”), Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation (“METCo”) and Makita USA, Inc. (“Makita”) for violations of Section 1 of the federal Sherman Act (“Sherman Act”), violation of California’s Cartwright Act...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO DISMISS and GRANTING and DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN PART THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant/Physicians Jean Remillard’s, Gregory Koury’s, Michael Sergeant’s, Mark Donnell’s,, and Don White’s joint Motion to Dismiss, filed August 1, 2012 [Doc. 123], brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6); on their joint Motion for Summary Judgment, filed Novembe...
Views: 0
Page 53282
ORDER DENYING THE GROWER DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Before the Court, without oral argument, is the Defendants Green Acre Farms, Inc. and Valley Fruit Orchards, LLC’s (collectively, “Grower Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3), ECF No. 255. The Grower Defendants ask the Court to 1) dismiss the post-October 2012—disclosed C...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs Kalimantano GmbH (“Kalimantano”), Tofik Davidoff (“Davidoff’), Konstantin Felde (“Felde”), and Johannes Schwegler (“Schwegler”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring suit against defendants Motion in Time, Inc. (“MIT”), Eddie Shamayev (“Eddie”), Michael Shamayev (“Michael”), Boris Shamayev (“Boris”), and David Shamayev (“David”) (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging vio...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before 2025 Pasco County must build more and larger roads to accommodate the inevitable increase in automobile traffic. Preferring to avoid the payment of “just compensation” after acquiring the necessary land by eminent domain, Pasco County has hatched a novel and effective but constitutionally problematic idea, a most uncommon regulatory regime that is crowned by Pasco County’s “Right o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants Dr. Jean Remillard’s, Dr. Gregory Koury’s, Dr. Michael Sergeant’s, Dr. Mark Donnell’s, Dr. Ronald Deyhle’s, and Don White’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December 20, 2012 (Doc. 196). The motion raises' a single issue: whether these Defendants are individually shielded from suit because pro-se Plaintiff Dr. Chinonye...
Views: 0
Page 53349
MEMORANDUM OPINION
During the initial pretrial conference, the Court resolved a number of the parties’ objections to proposed witnesses and exhibits, and ordered additional briefing regarding certain discrete issues. Presently before the Court are three motions in limine, two filed by the Defendant and one by the Plaintiff. Upon consideration of the pleadings,1 the relevant legal authorities, and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 342) filed by Defendant JBS USA, LLC frk/a JBS Swift & Co., a/k/a Swift Beef Company (“JBS”), and the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Filing No. 343) filed by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). The parties have filed briefs and indexes of evidence in support of their r...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the defendants’ motions for summary judgment (Dockets # 169 & 172), the plaintiffs oppositions thereto (Dockets # 197 & 210), and the parties’ respective replies (Dockets #220 & 238). After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the motions are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
Factual and Procedural Background
This case raises an issue of public im...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this case, a group of fathers and mothers, as well as their spouses and domestic partners, bring suit against Idalia Colón-Rondón, Secretary of Puerto Rico’s Department of the Family; and Rosabelle Padin-Batista, Administrator of Puerto Rico’s Child Support Administration.1 (Docket No. 1.) Plaintiffs style their suit as a writ of mandamus and a purported class action. (Id. ...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pending before the Court are: (a) Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment And Memorandum Of Law In Support Thereof, Docket No. 11; (b) plaintiffs response, Docket No. 16; (c) Defendant’s Reply To Plaintiff’s Opposition To Motion For Summary Judgment, Docket No. 23; (d) Report and Recommendation issued by the Magistrate Judge Silvia Carr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
RNPM, LLC (“Plaintiff’), a Nevada corporation with its principal place of business in Georgia, brings this foreclosure action on property owned by Rodolfo Cobas Mondriguez, Barbara Flora Leon Castro, and their conjugal partnership (collectively “Defendants”). Defendants’ 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss is presently before the court. (Docket No. 30.) Plaintiff opposed the motion at ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Susan Gerardi brought this medical negligence action against Defendants The Westerly Hospital, Dr. William Conlin, and physician’s assistant Lisa Ahava, to seek redress for her mother, Joanne Rebeiro’s death caused by an infection. After a more than two-week trial, a jury returned a unanimous verdict for all Defendants. Ms. Gerardi moved for a new trial (ECF No. 8...
Views: 0
PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
Julie Barrera, Courtroom Clerk.
Before the Court is Walgreen Company’s (“Walgreens’s” or “Defendant’s”) Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (Dkt. 5). The Court finds this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. After considering the moving, opposi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Henry Wilson (“Petitioner”) is serving a ten- to twenty-year state prison sentence for rape. Petitioner filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Habeas Petition,” ECF No. 1) challenging the execution of his sentence.1 U.S. Magistrate Judge Rueter recommended denial of the Habeas Petition (ECF No. 11), and Petitioner objécted (ECF No. 14) and impro...
Views: 0
ENTRY ON THE UNITED STATES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT and PLAINTIFFS’ CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT On April 20, 2000, Plaintiffs filed a “citizen suit” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq., as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (“SARA”), seeking to challenge various aspects of the ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the court pursuant to plaintiffs March 15, 2013 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. [Dkt. No. 4] The court held a hearing on this motion on April 1, 2013 at which the plaintiff was represented by Randall Armentrout, Thomas Cunningham and Ryan Leemkuil. The defendant was represented by Gene LaSuer and Deborah Tharnish. Plaintiffs application for a preliminary injuncti...
Views: 0
Page 53442
ORDER ON MOTION
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default and Default Judgment. D.E. 34.
THE COURT has considered the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
I. BACKGROUND
In their operative complaint, filed on September 12, 2012, Plaintiffs Patrice Baker, a “prominent businessman” in South Florida,...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
LAVERNE JOHNSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
*505
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the Court in this employment discrimination action is the Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Doc. 41). The Motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for our review. (Docs. 42, 44, 45). For the reasons that follow, we will grant the said Motion, as more fully articulated herein, and dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (doc. 23) with prejudice.
I. S...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendant Cox & Company, Ltd.’s, Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (DE 68). The Court held an evidentiary Hearing on the instant Motion (DE 68) on December 3, 2012. The Court has carefully reviewed said Motion, the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
I. Background
The above-styled cause arises out of a cruis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On May 4, 2012, plaintiff Kick Ass Pictures, Inc., filed the instant action pursuant to the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101, for the alleged infringement of its copyright in the motion picture “Cum Eating Cuckolds 17” (the “Motion Picture”). The complaint alleges that defendants “Does 1-25” engaged in illegal file sharing of the Motion Picture through the Intern...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction [46]. After the Court’s July 18, 2012, 878 F.Supp.2d 714 (S.D.Miss.2012), Order granting in part Plaintiffs’ original Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Plaintiffs unsuccessfully exhausted all available avenues to comply with Mississippi House Bill 1390 (“the Act”). As such, the State has indicated that ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This Title IX sexual-harassment case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment [14], Because the Court concludes that most of Plaintiffs claims are time-barred, but there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether his quid pro quo sexual-harassment claim was timely filed, the motion will be granted in part but otherwise denied. ...
Views: 0
Page 53577
ORDER
This is a suit concerning the Nevada Highway Patrol’s (“NHP”) K9 unit. Before the court are various defendants’ motions to dismiss. Defendants Makor K-9 and Rispoli have together filed a Motion to Dismiss (#31), as have defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (“LVMPD”) and Zeil (#32) and defendants Gillespie, English, and Jaeger (# 33). The remaining Nevada state defendants (r...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS (Docket Nos. 56 and 61)
Lead Plaintiff Thomas J. Primo and Plaintiff Evan Powell (collectively, Plaintiffs) assert claims on behalf of a putative class and subclass, for various violations of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Rules promulgated thereunder, against Defendants Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PacBio); Hu...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Dana Pasquale brings this action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“Rosenthal Act”), Cal. Civ.Code §§ 1788 et seq., alleging that telephone messages left on her home answering machine by Defendant Law Offices of Nels...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants the City and County of San Francisco (“the City”), San Francisco Police Officer N. Yu, and San Francisco Park Ranger J. Mitra (collectively, “Defendants”) bring the current motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief and Damages (“FAC”) brought by Plaintiffs ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Susan R. Castine (“plaintiff’ or “Castine”) brings this action against defendants Michael E. Zurlo, Clinton County Administrator, in his individual and official capacity (“Zurlo”), and Clinton County (collectively “defendants”) asserting First Amendment retaliation and a violation of the Due Process Clause.1 Plaintiff also seeks a declaratio...
Views: 0
Page 53668
*284DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Robert M. Wilson has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he challenges a 2009 judgment of conviction in Albany County Court, following a jury trial, of third degree criminal sale of a controlled substance. Dkt. No. 1, Petition (“Pet”) at 2. Respondent has filed a response to the petition, a memorandu...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Relator’s Motion Regarding Government Production of Documents Pursuant to Rule 45 Subpoena. Relator seeks to obtain confidential documents from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts (the “Government”), which were produced in the course of an investigation of Defendants Smith & Nephew, DJO and ReAble Therapeutics int...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter arises out of Defendant Continental Casualty Company’s (“Defendant” or “Continental”) motion for summary judgment against Plaintiff VierraMoore, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “VierraMoore”). (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff opposes the motion. (ECF No. 21.) For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED.1
BACKGROUND2
A. Factual Background
VierraMoore is a management...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. (Dkt. Nos. 6, 8, 17, 46, 57.) This case concerns Plaintiffs claim that Defendants are infringing his Canadian trademark Landcruise, Ltd. {“Landcruise”) used in connection with Plaintiffs motor home rental bu...
Views: 0
ORDER
This products liability action comes before the Court on Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc.’s (“Honda”) post-trial motions to strike expert testimony, for judgment as a matter of law, and for dispositive spoliation sanctions. For the reasons set forth below, Honda’s motions to strike expert testimony and for judgment as a matter of law are properly granted.
I. Background1
In March...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 05-0386 (ESH)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
HIRAM ANDRADES, pro se, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Richard N. Silver, :
:
Plaintiff, :
v. : Civil Action No. 12-1213 (CKK)
:
D.C. Metropolitan Police :
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MICHAEL R. FANNING,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1319 (CKK)
v.
ANGUS CORPORATION,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(April 16, 2013)
...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT OFFICERS’ MOTION TO DISMISS, GRANTING DEFENDANT EXPOSITOR MOTION TO DISMISS, AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT CITY OF MIAMI’S MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Miguel A. Exposito’s Motion to Dismiss (D.E. No. 24), filed on October 29, 2012, Defendant City of Mia*1207mi’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (D.E. No. 29), filed on Nov...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ age discrimination claims brought under Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4112. Doc. 9. For the reasons that follow, the Court DENIES Defendant’s Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Diane Flint and Sarah Ann Hill are former employees of Defendant, Mercy Health Partners of Southwes...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
In this civil action, Plaintiffs Government Employees Insurance Co., GEICO Indemnity Co., GEICO General Insurance Company, and GEICO Casualty Co. (collectively referred to here by the singular “GEICO”) seek to recover, before trebling, over $2 million in damages arising from its payment of Defendants’ allegedly fraudulent bills for no-fault insurance benefits. GEICO also seek...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
A one-count superseding indictment charges defendant Hector Cabral (“Cabral”) and three others with Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute and to *164Distribute Heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Defendant’s motions to suppress (Docket Nos. 84 and 85) were denied, in part, and allowed, in part, by a Court Order entered on April 9, 2013, “with memorandum and order...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case arises from the explosion of an oil tank at Plaintiffs’ residence on November 3, 2011. Plaintiffs have sued Defendant Preferred Mutual Insurance Company, alleging breach of contract, unfair trade practices under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, and violation of the implied covenant of good faith. They also seek a declarato...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt No. 5) I. INTRODUCTION This memorandum is intended to follow up on the court’s brevis in-court order on April 9, 2013, denying Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) claims on the basis of res judicata. The court’s decision remains unchanged; the memorandum will memorialize its reasoning....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding ECF Nos. 81; 82; 83; 841
This matter is before the Court on the cross Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Carolina Casualty Insurance Co. (“Carolina”) *572and Defendants/Counter-Claimants Gallagher Sharp, Robert Eddy and Alton Stephens (collectively, “Defendants”). ECF Nos. 81; 82; 83; 84-1 The parties responded (ECF Nos. 90...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (D.E. 42) THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (D.E. 42, 6/14/12). Plaintiff Margarita Tello filed a Response in Opposition (D.E. 43, 7/2/12), and Defendant filed a Reply in Support (D.E. 45, 7/12/12). Having considered the referenced fili...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Jenna Raglani filed this action against her former employer, defendant Ripken Professional Baseball (“RPB”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Maryland state law. Raglani alleges that she was discriminated against and terminated because of her gender. RPB has filed a motion to dismiss or to stay and compel arbitration, based on an arbitration agreement wit...
Views: 0
ORDER Quinton Keith Salley (“Petitioner”), a federal prisoner, moves to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (“Motion to Vacate”). The Government has filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment. The Court has thoroughly reviewed the record and finds the motions suitable for disposition without an evidentiary hearing. For the reason...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Defendant Warren Love was indicted in a seven-count superseding indictment with several drug trafficking and firearm-related offenses. Count 1 was a narcotics conspiracy count. Counts 2-4 related to the use of, and items seized from, a downstairs rear apartment (hereinafter “downstairs apartment”) at 399 Lake Avenue, Rochester, New York. Count 2 charged the defendant with poss...
Views: 0
ORDER:
(1) DENYING WINDSTREAM COMMUNICATION, INC.’S, MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT;
(2) DENYING NO COST CONFERENCE, INC.’S, MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
(3) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART WINDSTREAM COMMUNICATION, INC.’S, MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT;
(4) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PAETEC COMMUNICATION, INC.’S, MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; and
(5) G...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Marlon Holmes (“Holmes”) brought suit several years ago against police officers of the City of Springfield, Massachusetts pursuant to the federal civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for alleged constitutional violations. Before the Court is plaintiffs motion to reopen the case closed in 2010 and defendants’ consolidated opposition and motion to dismiss.
I. ...
Views: 0
Page 54040
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Linda Hohu (“Hohu”) filed an action in this Court seeking declaratory relief that two claims asserted in a pending California state court action by Defendant Wendy Hatch (“Hatch”), the Administrator of the Estate of John K. Hohu, are preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SAMUEL ACOSTA,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1578 (JEB)
FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se Plaintiff Samuel Aco...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RICHARD COLEMAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. 13-0133 (ESH)
)
KAY SILVER ...
Views: 0
Page 54107
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to Panel Rule 7. 1, plaintiffs in three actions listed on Schedule A move to vacate our order that conditionally transferred their actions to MDL No. 2226. Responding defendant Eli Lilly & Co. (Eli Lilly) supports the motions to the extent that they are based on the argument that each action was removed as a “mass action” under the Class Action Fairness A...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Before the Court is Defendant City of Memphis’ (“Memphis”) Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss (D.E. # 132) filed March 22, 2013.1 Davis filed a Response (D.E. # 135) on April 8, 2013, and filed an amendment to this Response (D.E. # 140) on April 10, 2013. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner Gearl Flowers (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the Howard R. Young Correctional Institution in Wilmington, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (D.I. 1), and the State’s motion to dismiss the application without prejudice for failure to exhaust state r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1. INTRODUCTION
The instant action was originally filed as an adversary proceeding1 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (“the bankruptcy court”). Plaintiff NHB Assignments LLC (“plaintiff’), as liquidating trustee on behalf of a liquidating trust, alleges that defendants General Atlantic LLC (“GA LLC”) and Braden Kelly (“Kelly”) (collectively, “de...
Views: 0
Page 54165
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (Doc. 30). Plaintiff filed a Response in opposition (Doc. 33). For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Procedural History
Plaintiff filed his Complaint pro se on December 2, 2011, stating multiple claims against various defendants. (Doc. 1...
Views: 0
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Doc. 19). Defendant originally filed a Motion to Dismiss on October 11, 2012, to which Plaintiff responded on October 28, 2012. (Doc. 13; Doc. 16). On March 20, 2...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 16) and Supplement to the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 30). Upon consideration of the Motion (Docs. 16 & 30), the briefs filed in opposition to and in support of the Motion, and the record as a whole, the court finds that the Motion for Summary Judgment (Docs. 16 & 30) is due to be GRANTED in PART a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ post-trial motions. Having considered the parties’ written submissions, the Court: (1) DENIES Citrix Systems, Inc. and Citrix Online, LLC’s (“Citrix”) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law and New Trial on Damages Pursuant to Fed.R.CivP. 50 and 59 (Dkt. No. 299); (2) DENIES SSL’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law that the '796...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently pending before the Court are: (1) Plaintiff Jacob Zimmerman’s Motion for Emergency Hearing on Preliminary Injunction, [dkt. 13]; (2) a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Mr. Zimmerman and Plaintiff Sean Sumwalt, [dkt. 18]; and (3) a Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Board of Trustees of Ball State University (the “Trustees”), Jo Ann M. Gora, Alan Hargrave, ...
Views: 1
Page 54370
Memorandum Opinion and Order
This opinion follows and assumes familiarity with the court’s earlier opinion in this case brought by California Northern Railroad Company against Gunderson Rail Services, LLC. 912 F.Supp.2d 662 (N.D.Ill. 2012). To review, Count I of the complaint alleges that Gunderson had and breached a duty under an indemnification provision in the parties’ Freight Car Inspection...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION, as Receiver for AmTrust
Bank,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1946 (JEB)
US TITLES, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Defendant TOL, Inc. (“TOL”) has filed a so-styled Motion to Dissolve, Alter, or Amend Preliminary Injunction pursuant to Fed.R.CivJP. 59(e) (“Rule 59 Motion”) (Docket No. 48), to which plaintiff Lloyd Randall Anderson filed a Response in opposition (Docket No. 53), and TOL filed a Reply (Docket No. 57). Anderson has filed a Motion to Reschedule Initial Case Management Conference and ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Theresa Zumbusch (“Zumbusch”), filed a Complaint in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Multnomah alleging one claim for negligence against defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”), arising from injuries that she suffered on July 28, 2010, when she slipped and fell. Pursuant to 28 USC § 1441(a), Wal-Mart timely removed the ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (Defs.’ Mot. Summ. J., Docket Number (“DN”) 16.) The Plaintiff responded. (PL’s Resp., DN 23.) The Defendants replied. (Defs.’ Reply, DN 24.) At the Court’s request, each party filed a supplemental brief addressing the applicability of the Kentucky Supreme Court’s decision in Kentucky R...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the cross-motions for summary judgment of plaintiff SurModics, Inc. (“SurModics”) and defendant Southern Research Institute (“SRI”). Both SurModics and SRI seek a declaration of their rights under a contract governing SRI’s sale of a third company—Brookwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Brookwood”)—to SurModics. The parties’ summary-judgment motions are each gra...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On October 14, 2011, Plaintiff brought suit against Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged deprivations of her rights under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and the Housing Choice Voucher Program, 42 U.S.C. § 1437f. A bench trial was held on March 4 and March 7, 2013. The Court has carefully considered the parties’ exhibits, the testimony of the witnes...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 537
BACKGROUND 538
*537Factual History.............................................................538
The Parties............................................................538
The Hepatitis C Virus...................................................538
DOCCS’ Hepatitis C Primary Care Practice Guidelines......................539
Pla...
Views: 0
UNSEALED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Sentencing Memorandum for De*1218fendant Elizabeth Gracia [sic], filed August 14, 2012 (Doc. 36) (“Sentencing Memo.”). The Court held a sentencing hearing on October 18, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court should decrease Defendant Elizabeth Garcia’s offense level two levels pursuant to the U.S.S....
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 22) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), filed by Defendants General Motors LLC1 (“GM”), All Star Advertising Agency, Inc., All Star Chevrolet North, L.L.C., and All Star Chevrolet, Inc. (the All Star Defendants are referred to as “All Star”). Plaintiff, Felder’s Collision Parts...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Backpage.com, LLC’s Motion for Tempo*813rary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (“Motion”) (Doc. No. 4). In this action, Backpage.com, LLC (“Back-page.com”) challenges a recently enacted Tennessee law, TenmCode Ann.. § 39-13-315 (“section 39-13-315” or “the statute”), that criminalizes the.sale of certain sex-oriented advertisements. Backpag...
Views: 3
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Defendant George J. Foxx’s Opposition to Notice of Removal by Ocwen and Deutsche Bank, which this Court construes as a motion to remand, (Dkt. 5) and the Response in opposition thereto filed by Third-Party Defendant, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (“Ocwen”), and Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trustee U...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the United States’ Objections to Presentence Report, filed May 4, 2012 (Doc. 89) (“U.S. Objections”); and (ii) the Defendant Vincent Garcia’s Formal Objections to the Presentence Report, filed August 6, 2012 (Doc. 101) (“V. Garcia Objections”). The Court held an evidentiary hearing on August 15, 2012. The primary issues are...
Views: 0
Page 55165
OPINION DECISION AND ORDER
On November 20, 2012, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) brought this action against defendants CR Intrinsic Investors, LLC (“CR Intrinsic”)/Mathew Martoma (“Martoma”), and Sidney Gilman (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging violations of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 785(b) (“§ 10(b)”), ...
Views: 0
*243
ORDER
Nancy Jackson (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the City of New York, Police Officers Shawn Johnston, Danielle Campo, John Dammacco, John Doe and Richard Roe (names and number of whom are currently unknown), Sergeant Alex Montesquieu, and other unidentified members of the New York City Police Department (collectively “Defendants”) in connection with an incident where Plaint...
Views: 0
Page 55218
OPINION
This case is before the court on Defendant O’Reilly Automotive Stores’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment (# 57) on its Amended Counterclaims (# 26). The underlying case is a contract dispute. While Plaintiff All Star Championship Racing’s (“Plaintiff’) claims are still being litigated and are proceeding independently, Defendant has filed five counterclaims. The present opinion ad...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) filed by defendants John Sobeck, Cynthia Broskie and the H Group BBT, Inc. (“the H Group”) (Doc. 15). Jane Doe, by her mother and guardian Sabra Smith (“Sabra”) and by her father Mark Smith, has responded to the motion (Doc. 19), and the defendants have replied t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs UnitedHealth Group, Inc. and Humana Health Plan Inc., two health insurers, have moved to remand these actions that Defendants (collectively, “GSK”) removed from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. Both cases were commenced by the filing of a “Praecipe to Issue Writ of Summons for the Purpose of Taking Pre-Complaint Interrogatories,” remov...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Denying the Defendants’ Motion to Reconsider Re Document No.: 43 I. INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the court on the defendants’ motion to reconsider. The parties are embroiled in an international patent dispute.1 They initially litigated this dispute in the courts of Korea, and that country’s highest court of appeal ruled for the plaintiff. The plaintiff then filed suit...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TIMOTHY D. NAEGELE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 03-cv-2507 (RLW)
DEANNA J. ALBERS, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
For the reasons s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Choice Hotels International, Inc. brings this action against two former franchisees—Defendants Mrs. Ilaben and Mr. Vinodbhai Patel—for continuing to use Comfort Inn trademarks after the parties’ franchise agreement terminated on April 8, 2009. Choice Hotels now argues that it is entitled to summary judgment, both on liability and for treble damages, because the Pa...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Nassau Precision Casting Co., Inc. (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against Acushnet Company, Inc., Cobra Golf Company, and Puma North America, Inc. (“Defendants”) for patent infringement under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. Defendants move for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 on the bases of noninfringement and in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before this Court on Defendants John S. Ruch (“Ruch”) and Westover Bon Air Insurance, LLC’s (“Westover”) (collectively, “Defendants”) MOTION TO DISMISS (Docket No. 20), the Amended Complaint filed against them by The Cincinnati Insurance Company (“Cincinnati”), the assignee of Hylton Hall Properties, LLC (“Hylton Hall”). For the reasons set forth below, the motio...
Views: 0
Nancy Jackson (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the City of New York, Police Officers John Dammacco and John Doe, and Sergeant Alex Montesquieu (collectively, “Defendants”) in connection with an incident where Plaintiff was pulled over while driving and arrested for obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, resisting arrest, reckless driving, harassment in the second ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Ashley Nicole Richards and Brent Justice (collectively, “Defendants”) were indicted on five counts of violating the federal “animal crush video” statute, 18 U.S.C. § 48 (effective Dec. 9, 2010). Pending before the court are Brent Justice’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry No. 29) and Ashley Nicole Richards’ Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry No. 30). Defendan...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL (Re: Docket No. 33)
Plaintiff Tricia Ogden (“Ogden”) moves to compel Defendant Bumble Bee Foods, LLC (“Bumble Bee”) to provide more complete responses to her interrogatories, requests for admissions, and requests for production. Having considered the parties’ papers and arguments, the court GRANTS-IN-PART Ogden’s motion.
The parties are familiar...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SERVICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION NATIONAL
INDUSTY PENSION FUND, et al.,
Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 12-1233 (CKK)
v.
BERNADETTE ARTHAREE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case concerns the tragic death of Mr. Terry Riggs. Plaintiff Argia Riggs, Mr. Riggs’ wife, brought this suit pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., challenging Defendant Metropolitan *174Life Insurance Company’s (“MetLife”) denial of her application for optional life insurance benefits following the death of her husband based on t...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. BACKGROUND
This case concerns allegations of deception and bad faith against a health insurance company, The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”). The heart of the complaint is that Prudential stopped selling a certain health insurance policy to new customers (“closing the block”), knowing that this would result in prohibitive increases in premium rates as sick poli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
This ease arises out of an insurance coverage dispute. Plaintiff Progress Bulk Carriers (“Progress Bulk”) charters and operates ocean-going vessels. Defendant American Steamship Owners Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (“American Club” or “Club”) is a protection and indemnity association that provides marine insurance coverage to vessel owners and charterer...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALAN J. BAUER, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-1267 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
*153DECISION AND ORDER
This Decision and Order addresses the Defendants’ motion to compel, and Plaintiff Chante Ott’s (“Ott”) expedited non-disposi-tive motion to compel and for partial withdrawal of that motion.1
Defendants’ Motion to Compel
To provide context for the Defendants’ motion to compel, the Court begins by summarizing the relevant allegations of the Complaint. This action pursuant to ...
Views: 0
Page 55732
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REARGUMENT, RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT
I. Background1
This action arose out of a longstanding dispute between the plaintiff, James P. McGee (“McGee”), and one of the fifteen named defendants, James Dunn (“Dunn”). In his complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern Distri...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioners Global Gold Mining LLC and Global Gold Corp. have filed this Petition to confirm part of a “Partial Final Award” entered on March 29, 2012, pursuant to ongoing arbitration between them and Respondent Caldera Resources, Inc. (“Respondent” or “Caldera”). See Caldera Res., Inc. v. Global Gold Mining LLC et al, American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) Case No: 50-180-0...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Union Leader Corporation (“Union Leader”), a New Hampshire newspaper, filed a complaint based on the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, seeking to compel Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), a division of the Department of Homeland Security, to produce records of the names and addresses of six individuals ICE arrested in 2011. ICE filed a motio...
Views: 0
*440
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion for Class Certification of Lead Plaintiffs BIM Intermobiliare SGR (“BIM”), Robert Ahearn, and DRYE Custom Pallets (“DRYE”). Plaintiffs allege that the accounting firm Grant Thornton (“GT”) committed securities fraud in violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated ther...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This suit arises out of a terrorist attack in Tel Aviv, Israel on April 17, 2006. The attack injured Yekutiel Wultz and led to Daniel Wultz’s death on May 14, 2006. Four members of the Wultz family brought suit against Bank of China (“BOC”) on August 28, 2008, more than two years later, alleging acts of international terrorism and aiding and abetting internationa...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 30) and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 32). For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion and DENIES Plaintiffs Motion.
I.
On December 16, 2007, Jama Farah was driving a semi tractor-trailer on Interstate 78 in New Jersey. It was snowing and Farah’s truck j...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint filed by Defendants Corizon Health, Sancho, and Orr. ECF No. 46. I. FACTS The Court accepts the following allegations as true for the purpose of resolving this motion. Cahill v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 80 F.3d 336, 337-38 (9th Cir.1996). This case arises from the death of Plaintiffs’ d...
Views: 4
*404
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is a Motion for Summary Judgment as to Third Party Demand of the Kansas City Southern Railway Company [Doc. 53], filed by the defendant/third party defendant, UOP LLC (“UOP”).1 The defendant/third party plaintiff, Kansas City Southern Railway (“KCSR”), simultaneously filed a Motion to Amend its Third Party Demand Against UOP and Southern Ionics [Doc. 59],...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff in this case, B & A Demolition and Removal, Inc. (“B & A”) seeks a declaratory judgment against the Defendant Markel Insurance Company, LLC (“Markel”), affirming that Markel has an obligation to indemnify B & A in a lawsuit presently pending in New York State Supreme Court. Presently before the Court is the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a case brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 207 (the “FLSA”), and parallel provisions of the New York State Labor Law, seeking minimum wage and overtime compensation. Plaintiffs represent themselves and seek to represent a class of persons similarly situated. Presently before the court are Plaintiffs’ motions to dismiss Defendants’ counterclai...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, William A. Boyd, filed this pro se action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227 et al, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, against the Defendants: General Revenue Corporation (“GRC”), United Student Aid Fund, Inc. (“USA Funds”) and Sallie Mae Inc.1 (“Sallie Mae”). Plaintiffs claims are that Defendants violat...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff Linda Lee (“Lee”) asserts claims against the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (“DCF”) and Joette Katz (“Katz”) in her official capacity as Commissioner of DCF, for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA”); the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq.; the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. (FHA), generally makes it unlawful to deny a “dwelling” to a person based on the person’s handicap. See 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f). The question presented is whether student housing at the University of Nebraska-Kearney (UNK) is a “dwelling” within the meaning of the FHA. The Court concludes that it is, making the anti-discrimination pro...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion in Limine to Preclude the Testimony and Records of Psychologist Sabrina Breed, Ph.D. at trial [Rec. Doc. 164-15] and Plaintiffs’ Opposition thereto [Rec. Doc. 176]. De*108fendants seek to preclude Dr. Breed’s testimony and the introduction of her records of her treatment of Mr. Barack. Plaintiffs’ seek to have Dr. Breed testify as Plaintiff Ron Bara...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This lawsuit concerns monies that were transferred to defendants as part of a Ponzi scheme operated by a third party, Lizette Morice. The plaintiffs, who lost their investments in the fraudulent scheme, seek the voidance of these transfers under the Pennsylvania Uniform Fraudulent Trans*575fer Act and the equitable doctrine of unjust enrichment. In the instant motion, they move for s...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Pending before the court is a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 75), and brief in support, (ECF No. 76), filed by plaintiffs Wayne L. Hepler (“Hepler”) (individually and on behalf of WLH Enterprises (“WLH”)), Carrie E. Kolesar (“Kolesar”), and Seneca Hardwood Lumber Company, Inc. (“SLHC”), (collectively, “plaintiffs”), and the response in opposit...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Dawn Geraty, a police officer in the Village of Antioch (“the Village”), brought a single-count complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., alleging that the Village discriminated against her on the basis of her sex by failing to promote her to the position of police sergeant and by failing to transfer her to the position of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
ALBERT SHADE, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1774 (PLF)
...
Views: 1
*1157MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The government alleges in this civil action under 18 U.S.C. § 248(a)(1) that the defendant Angel Dillard sent a threatening letter to Dr. Mila Means, a provider of abortion services. The general background of the case has been fully discussed by the court in its prior Order denying Dillard’s Motion to Dismiss, in which it found that a rational recipient of the one-page l...
Views: 0
Page 56161
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is pending for consideration of Defendants Walmac Stud Management, LLC (‘Walmac Stud”), Walmac Farm, LLC (“Walmac Farm”), Lincoln-Walmac Associated Farm Pty Ltd. (“Lincoln-Walmac”), John T.L. Jones III (“Jones”), and Saybrook Advertising, LLC’s (“Saybrook”) Motion to Dismiss Counts Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Eleven, Twelve, and Fourteen of the Second A...
Views: 0
ORDER
The captioned case is before the court for consideration of defendants’ motion to dismiss [8].
I. Facts1
On May 28, 1992, First Union National Bank of Florida (“First Union”) obtained a judgment against Paul E. Orr, Jr. and Harriet I. Orr in the County Court of Broward County, Florida, for the principal sum 'of $4,017,90, interest of $1,226.04, court costs of $162.00, and attorneys’ fees ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (“FLSA”) is before the Court on Defendants’ Joint Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint or, Alternatively, Motion to Stay Proceedings (hereinafter referred to as “Motion to Compel Arbitration”) [Doc. 6]. The issue before the Court, whether a contractual waiver of the right to ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REDUCE RESTITUTION UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3664© (DOC. 58), AND DENYING AS MOOT MOTIONS FOR STATUS OF CASE (DOC. 64) AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF EARLIER FILED MOTIONS (DOC. 65) On October 5, 2005, this court sentenced Thomas Kopatich to 126 months imprisonment and ordered him to repay $4,500 drug buy money as a condition of supervised release. On January 5, 2006, U.S. District Ju...
Views: 0
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First Amended Complaint, all the records and files herein, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, Defendant Kamala D. Harris’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiffs Response to Harris’s Objections, and P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This section 1983 action, under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983), commenced on October 27, 2010, proceeds on the amended complaint and arises from eminent domain proceedings conducted in Pennsylvania state court. Before the court is defendants’ Rosenn Jenkins and Greenwald, LLP (“RJG”), Gary Taroli (“Taroli”), John T. Zelinka (“Zelinka”), Columbia County Redevelopment Au...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiffs Tony Kole and Ghost Industries, LLC sued the Village of Norridge (the “Village”) and various Village officials for allegedly impeding Plaintiffs’ attempts to open and operate a gun store in the Village. Presently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. R. 13. On March 22 and 28, 2012, the Court (Judge Norgle) issued ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-1874 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This case arises out of a recording contract between plaintiff Yngwie J. Malmsteen, a musician, and defendant UMG Recordings, Inc. (“UMG”). Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment on Malmsteen’s sole remaining claim in this case: a breach of contract claim against UMG and its indirect parent, Universal Music Group, Inc. (collectively with UMG, “defendants”), alle...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 11). Plaintiffs oppose the Motion (Doc. No. 12) and Defendant has filed a Reply in support (Doc. No. 13).
A motion to dismiss involuntarily is a dispositive motion on which a Magistrate Judge is ordinarily required to file a report and recommenda...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER1
Before the Court is the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil *135Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) by defendant Prime Steak House Restaurant Corp. (“defendant PSHRC”). (Docket No. 19.) Having considered the arguments in the motion to dismiss, the opposition filed by plaintiffs Moisés Perez (“plaintiff Perez”) and Alejandro Velez-Cespon (“plaintiff Velez”) (col...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants’ motions to dismiss [DE 23, 24] filed on November 14, 2012. Plaintiffs filed responses [DE 31, 32] on December 10, 2012. Defendants filed a joint reply [DE 34] on December 20, 2012. A hearing was held on the matter on January 18, 2013. This motion is ripe for adjudication.
I. Background
Plaintiffs Wiln...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is debtor Allen L. Wisdom’s appeal from the Bankruptcy Court’s Order approving the Chapter 7 Trustee’s Final Report. Wisdom objected to the report, contending that the trustee had wrongly liquidated five of his life insurance policies. Wisdom also contended that the trustee violated fiduciary duties and committed fraud. The bankruptcy cour...
Views: 0
UN!TED sTATEs DISTRICT CoURT § l L E D
FoR THE nlsrmcr oF CoLUMBIA
APR t a 2913
) d . - 'r‘~'- ' t- d
UNITEI) STATES oF AMERICA ) f"‘?§"§;\\§i;,.$p"t§'§$§"$§r§"
)
v. ) 925
) Criminal No. 90-27-(}1
MICHELLE ASHToN, )
)
Defendant. )
)
MEMoRANDUM oPlNloN
Before the Court is defendant Michelle Ashton's Motion [120] to Vacate Sentence
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Defendant claims that her Sixth Amen...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Defendant Cruise Ship Excursions, Inc.’s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Demand for Jury Trial (D.E. No. 17), filed on February 19, 2013. THE COURT has considered the motion, the response, and the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ADJUDGED that the motion is ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Robert Bouvier seeks attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) (ECF No. 15) after this Court issued judgment in his favor (ECF No. 14) concerning his application for Social Security disability benefits. The Commissioner objects to an award of fees (ECF No. 16) claiming that she was “substantially justified” in defending the case. This Court finds that the ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants having renewed their motion for summary judgment, this Opinion responds to the April 5, 2012 direction of the Court of Appeals, Viacom Int’l Inc. v. YouTube, Inc., 676 F.3d 19, 42 (2d Cir. 2012), remanding to
... allow the parties to brief the following issues, with a view to permitting renewed motions for summary judgment as soon as practicable:
(A) Whether, on the current rec...
Views: 0
Page 56649
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On March 6, 2012, the Debtor EMS Financial Services, LLC (“EMS”) filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Eastern District of New York before United States Bankruptcy Judge Alan S. Trust. On May 30, 2012, the Plaintiff Kenneth Kirschenbaum, Esq., the Chapter 7 Trustee for EMS (“the Trustee”), filed an adversa...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
BEFORE THE COURT is Petitioner Maria Marcella Rodriguez Munoz’ Verified Petition for Return of Child. (Doc. 1). This case was referred to the Magistrate Judge for the Midland/Odessa Division on August 2, 2012, by Order of Referral from the United States District Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Appendix C of the Local Rules. (Doc. 6). On October 26, 20...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Lead Plaintiff Pennsylvania Public School Employees-’ Retirement System *448(“Plaintiff’) brings this putative class action against Bank of America Corporation (“BoA”) and current and past officers and directors of BoA: Kenneth D. Lewis, Joseph Lee Price, II, Brian T. Moynihan, Neil Cotty, and Charles H. Noski (the “Executive Defendants”). The Executive Defendants move to dis...
Views: 0
Page 56793
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), filed this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. on behalf of Claimants Kayla Roberts, Ashley Hopmayer, and Miranda Watson against Defendant, The Finish Line, Inc. (“Finish Line”), claimants’ former employer. Plaintiffs claims are that claimants were sexually harassed by...
Views: 0
OPINION
Pending before the Court is Relator Nicholas DePace’s “Application for Emergent Relief to Reopen Pursuant to L. Civ. R. 41.1(b) and for the Court’s Determination of Reasonableness of Attorney’s Fee Pursuant to L. Civ. R. 103.1(a)” (the “Application”). For the reasons discussed below, Relator’s Application to Reopen will be granted; however, the relief requested by the Relator will be deni...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Petitioner,
v. Civil Action No. 11-mc-512
(GK/DAR)
DELOITTE TO...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendants Weds Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Weds Fargo”) and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation’s (“FHLMC”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 22). The Court, having considered the relevant pleadings, finds that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted.
BACKGROUND
On or about April 18, 2003, Plaintiff Robert Sgroe and his wife, Shirley...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 7, 2013, Plaintiff Veronica Hasbun filed the present one-count Amended Complaint sounding in negligence against Defendants the United States and Resurrection Health Care Corporation pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2671. Before the Court are Defendants’ motions to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S VERIFIED MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER [DKT. 36]
This matter came before the Court on a Verified Motion for Protective Order filed by Defendant American Family Mutual Insurance Company [Dkt. 36], American Family seeks a protective order to prevent the discovery of its claim file, reserve determinations, as well as the depositions of attorneys Brent Threlkeld, Benjamin Stevens...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT; MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON CROSS-COMPLAINT
On February 1, 2012, Marwan Aboulhosn filed this action against Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith, Inc. (“Merrill Lynch”) and certain fictitious defendants.1 *1208On April 12, 2012, Merrill Lynch filed a counterclaim against Aboulhosn.2 On December 17, 2012, Merrill Lynch filed ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the court on American Honda Motor Co. Inc.’s (“Honda”) motion to redact the trial transcript. Specifically, Honda requests that the Plaintiff counsel’s reference to the settlement amount with Honda be redacted because the Plaintiff and Honda entered into a settlement agreement containing a confidentiality provision regarding the settlement amount.
The public ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Richard Snyder brought suit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as successor in interest to Wachovia Bank, N.A. (‘Wachovia”) for, inter alia, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. Snyder claimed to have suffered investment losses as a result of Wachovia’s failure to exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution in making investment decisions reg...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
A jury convicted defendant Mohamed Osman Mohamud of attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction, specifically a destructive device or explosive bomb, against a person or property within the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2332a(a)(2)(A). Before the court are defendant’s Motion for Judgment of Acquittal After Jury Verdict [431] and Motion for a New Trial [432]. I de...
Views: 0
Page 57012
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING CLAIMANT’S MOTION FOR ORDER REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFSET AND FOR LITIGATION COSTS1
I. BACKGROUND
On March 18, 2011, Milwaukee police officers entered the residence of Jonathan Marshall (“Marshall”) pursuant to a search warrant and seized over 100 grams of marijuana, digital scales, weapons, ammunition, a bullet-proof vest, and $3,174 cash. Shortly thereafter, Marshal...
Views: 0
Page 57079
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Frederick Schatzel has sued the Central States Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund (Central States) and the Western Pennsylvania Teamsters and Employers Pension Fund (Western Pennsylvania) for pension benefits that he contends the defendants owe him. Schatzel alleges that defendants violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S....
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
On March 14, 2013, this Court heard oral argument with respect to pending Motions for Class Certification in three separate actions that assert claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, including this action. In addition, the parties have extensively briefed the motions. For the reasons that follow, the Court shall DEN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Elizabeth Castro, Michael A. Florez, and LaTonya Brooks filed a two-count complaint charging their former employer, DeVry University, with (a) subjecting them to a hostile work environment through derogatory racial and ethnic statements by their supervisor, and (b) terminating their employment in retaliation for complaining about the supervisor’s conduct,...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s partial motion to dismiss [DE 10]. For the reasons stated herein, the defendant’s motion is DENIED. BACKGROUND On or before November 2011, Lawrence F. Dudley entered into a mortgage loan agreement (“Dudley Debt”) with defendant Green Tree Servicing, LLC (“Green Tree”). At some point thereafter, Mr. Dudley passed away leaving the Dudley D...
Views: 0
Page 57144
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ cross motions for partial summary judgment. Upon review of the parties’ briefs, the Court concludes that factual determinations preclude summary judgment on the parties’ claims. However, the Court will address some of the parties’ arguments regarding interpretation of the policy.
This dispute concerns the availability of cover...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner David Barnett’s Motion to Amend Judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), filed on August 7, 2012 [ECF No. 84]. Petitioner requests that this Court vacate its previous judgment of July 10, 2012, and amend its order to grant a hearing on the claims presented in Barnett’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion and supplemental petition, both...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this patent infringement case, Suffolk Technologies LLC (“Suffolk”), the sole owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,081,835 (“the '835 patent”), sues defendant Google, Inc. (“Google”)1 for infringement and will-*603fill infringement of the '835 patent, which purports to cover several methods for controlling a server in response to requests for files from web pages. As is typical in a...
Views: 0
Page 57187
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants Michael Han (“Mr. Han”) and Envión, Inc.’s (“Envión”) (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion re: Objections to the March 21 Order of Magistrate Buchanan Granting Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint and Motion to Compel [Dkt. 130] (hereafter referred to as “Defendants’ Objections”). For the following reasons...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff State Farm Fire & Casualty Company (“State Farm”), as subrogee, invoked our diversity jurisdiction1 and filed a one-count subrogation complaint against defendants Mark and Patricia Steffen alleging that their negligence caused a July 3, 2009 fire that damaged its insured’s property.
The Steffens filed a motion for summary judgment. They claim that State Farm’s Pennsylvania ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.1 Also before the Court are plaintiffs’ motions to deem in rem jurisdiction perfected2 or, in the alternative, to issue a warrant for arrest3 and to appoint a consent guardian.4 For the following reasons, the Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss and denies plaintiffs’ motions as moot.
I. BACKGROUN...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
Before the Court is the motion of the government to forcibly medicate defendant Brian Horton for the purpose of restoring him to competency. (Doc. No. 66.) A hearing was held on the motion on January 3, 2013, which was continued to April 10, 2013, upon defendant’s request to obtain an independent psychiatric evaluation. On April 11, 2013, the Sixth Circuit issued a decision on the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The case came on for a preliminary hearing pursuant to Rule 5.1(a), Fed. R.Civ.P. The issue is whether on the facts, there is probable cause to believe that the defendant made a false claim of United States citizenship in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 911. The facts are undisputed. On January 24, 2018, Homeland Security Investigations Special Agents (“agents”) executed a federal ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Lale Karakus and Isro Karakus, aka Kevin Isa Karakus (“the Karakuses”) brought this action against defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) in connection with a home mortgage refinancing. Plaintiffs assert federal claims as well as state statutory and common law claims. As relief, they effective*322ly seek to rescind two loans they received from Wells Far...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DISCOVERY CONFERENCE This matter is before the Court following an informal discovery conference, which was held before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge on February 20, 2013 (DE #27). The Honorable Cecilia M. Altonaga, United States District Judge, has referred all discovery matters in this case to the undersigned (DE # 10). Following the discovery conference, the Court ent...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on Defendant Cobb County’s motion to dismiss [15].
*1304I. Background
A. Procedural History and Facts Alleged in Complaint
Plaintiff, Taylor Gipson, filed suit against Defendants Popeye’s Chicken & Biscuits and Cobb County, Georgia contending that Defendants violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act when he was asked to leave a Popeye’s ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff Marian Campione brought the instant action against the Defendant *281Frank Campione, her brother, claiming that he improperly refused to give up his joint tenancy in certain stock that was transferred to the parties in 1973 by another non-party sibling. Presently before the Court is a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Fe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On May 22, 2012, the Plaintiff United States of America (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action seeking to collect an assessed federal estate tax from the Estate of Ada Talbot, now deceased. In this regard, the United States of America seeks judgment against the defendant Nancy Blake (“the Defendant”), as personal representative for the Estate of Ada Talbot, decea...
Views: 0
ORDER
ON JANUARY 17, 2013, Plaintiffs were directed to show cause in writing why all claims other than those asserted by Sean and Kristina Barber against America’s Wholesale Lender should not be severed and dismissed without prejudice (Dkt. 105). Plaintiffs responded to the Order by arguing that their claims satisfy the permissive joinder requirements under Rule 20, Federal Rules of Civil Proce...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FILED
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APR 1 2 2013
...
Views: 0
ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on March 27, 2013. Plaintiffs appeared by their counsel George Kimbrell, and defendant appeared by her counsel Gerald Kell. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, the court hereby GRANTS plaintiffs’ mo...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DFEH’S MOTION TO PROCEED FOR GROUP OR CLASS RELIEF
I. INTRODUCTION
The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) filed suit against the Law School Admission Council, Inc. (“LSAC”), seeking damages and injunctive relief over alleged failures of the Defendant to provide disability-related accommodations to test-takers of the Law School Admission Test (“LSAT”), in ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING AMTHRAX’ S MOTION TO QUASH I. INTRODUCTION On February 8, 2013, Signature Management Team, LLC (“TEAM”) submitted a proposed subpoena pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (“DMCA”). The proposed subpoena was directed to Automattic, Inc. (“Automattic”), the provider of the systems and network in which “Amthrax,” the alleged infringer, posted a copyrighted work. The ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief brought under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (“FOIA”). The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on February 13, 2013. Plaintiffs appeared by them counsel Duffy Carolan and Kent Spriggs, and defendants appeared by their counsel Ann Marie R...
Views: 1
Page 57481
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff The Cincinnati Insurance Company filed suit against Defendants All Plumbing, Inc. Service, Parts, Installation (“All Plumbing”), Mr. Kabir Shafik, and FDS Restaurant, Inc., seeking a declaratory judgment that the Plaintiff owes no duty to defend or indemnify All Plumbing and Shafik in connection with a class action lawsuit filed by FDS Restaurants against All Plumbing...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Pending before the Court is Defendant and Counterclaimant By Lee Tillett, Inc.’s (“Tillett’s”) motion for a preliminary injunction, filed on February 11, 2013. (Docket No. 30.) Plaintiff and Counterdefendant Boldface Licensing + Branding (“Boldface”) opposed on February 19 and Tillett replied on February 25. The Court heard oral argument o...
Views: 0
Page 57516
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action by two environmental groups—Alaska Community Action on Toxics and the Alaska Chapter of the Sierra Club (“Plaintiffs”)—against the Alaska Railroad Corporation and Aurora Energy Services, LLC (“Defendants”) for violations of the Clean Water Act at the Seward Coal Loading Facility. Plaintiffs and Defendants have filed cross motions for summary judgment on eac...
Views: 0
Page 57608
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Government has applied for a Rule 41 search and seizure warrant targeting a computer allegedly used to violate federal bank fraud, identity theft, and computer security laws. Unknown persons are said to have committed these crimes using a particular email account via an unknown computer at an unknown location. The search would be accomplished by surreptitiously installin...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
WYE OAK TECHNOLOGY, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
ROBERT F. COOPER, JR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
)
DARLENE C. ROBINSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GREGORY SLATE,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 09-1761 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
AMERICAN BROAD...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brings this action against, inter alia, Danny Garber, Kenneth Yellin, Jordan Feinstein (collectively, “Individual Defendants”), the OGP Group LLC, Rio Sterling Holdings LLC, and Slow Train *376Holdings LLC (“Entity Defendants” and, together with Individual Defendants, “Defendants”).1 The SEC alleges that Defendants...
Views: 0
*138MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is defendant Maryanne Fike’s (“Fike”) application, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, for an award of the reasonable attorneys’ fees she incurred in making her motion to compel plaintiff Bravia Capital Partners, Inc. (“Bravia”) to make disclosures in response to her discovery demands. Bravia opposes the application, contending th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The background of this patent infringement case has been laid out in two prior opinions. See IA Labs CA LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., 863 F.Supp.2d 430 (D.Md. 2012); IA Labs CA LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., 2012 WL 1565296 (D.Md. May 1, 2012). IA Labs CA, LLC (“IA Labs”) sued Nintendo Co., Ltd. and Nintendo of America, Inc. (collectively, “Nintendo”) for infringement of two patents...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT
I. Introduction
On March 16, 2012, Plaintiff Sharon Baker-Bey filed her Complaint (ECF 1) *661claiming common law defamation, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence against Defendant Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. (“Delta”) and fourteen Delta officials, including the National President (collectively, “Defendants”). On October 10, 2012,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought by Shawnfatee “Shawn” Bridges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On February 3, 1998, the petitioner was convicted of first-degree murder of Gregory and Damon Banks and other crimes in Pennsylvania state court. After a separate penalty hearing, the petitioner was sentenced to die. His death sentence has been stay...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Salvatore Barbatano brought this adversary proceeding in his capacity as Litigation Trustee in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Corus Bankshares, Inc. (“CBI”), In re Corus Bankshares, Inc., No. 10-26881 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.) (Hollis, J.). The six-count complaint alleges that Robert Glickman, the CEO and a director of CBI, and Tim Taylor, CBI’s chief financial officer, breach...
Views: 0
Pending before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint. (D.I. 16). On November 29, 2011, plaintiff Martin Bartesch filed this putative class action against defendants Brent M. Cook, Martin F. Petersen, John T. Perry, Richard D. Clayton, Nicholas Goodman, Kraig T. Higginson, Reynold Roeder, Barry Markowitz, Alan G. Perriton, James A. Herickhoff, and Scott E. Doughman, alleg...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the Court on petitioner’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In his motion, petitioner, Mr. Graham, contends that his felon in possession of a firearm convictions should be vacated and he should be resentenced in light of United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237 (4th Cir.2011) (en banc). The government has moved to dismiss M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ motion for new trial. (Pis.’ Mot., Docket Number (“DN”) 62.) The Defendant has responded. (Def.’s Resp., DN 66.) The Plaintiffs have replied. (Pis.’ Reply, DN 67.) Fully briefed, this matter is now ripe for adjudication. Having considered the matter and being fully advised, the Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANT*837ED IN ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Melissa Greenstein has brought this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. and the Kansas Wage Payment Act, K.S.A. 44-312 et seq. alleging unpaid straight time and overtime compensation. Plaintiff worked as a news producer for a Kansas City television station owned by defendant Meredith Corporation. This case is before the court ...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE; (2) DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE; (S) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On April 22, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America”) (doc. *756#22). Nathan T. Anderson, Esq., appeared on behalf of Bank of America. Kenneth Grubbs, Esq., and ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ CROSS-MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
Before the Court are Plaintiffs Joseph M. Morrison and Allison B. Morrison’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (D.E. # 62) filed on September 26, 2012, and Defendants Regions Financial Corporation (“Regions”) and Blue Cross and B...
Views: 0
Page 57947
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 75]. The Court has reviewed Defendant’s Motion, the opposing and supporting briefs, and the evidence on the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants in part and denies in part Defendant’s Motion.
Plainti...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion & Order
I.Introduction
This case involves claims of age, disability, race, and gender discrimination, as well as claims of fraud, hostile work environment, and retaliation. Before the Court is Defendant Auburn University Montgomery’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 6), filed on July 19, 2012. In its motion, Defendant Auburn University Montgomery (“Defendant” or “AUM”) contends that P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a diversity action arising out of the parties’ online business venture promoting the sale of precious metals. Plaintiff Randal Strauss (“Strauss”) requests the winding up and dissolution of the parties’ “de facto” partnership and alleges breach of contract and, alternatively, unjust enrichment. (Filing 1-2, Complaint.) Defendant Centennial Precious Metals, Inc.’s (“Ce...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is co-defendant St. Luke’s Memorial Hospital, Inc. motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 65). For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the co-defendant’s motion.
I. BACKGROUND
On April 30, 2010, plaintiffs Mayela Maldonado-Rodriguez, Jorge Perez-Lugo, Jorge M. Perez-Maldonado, and Marieli Maldonado (hereinafter collectively referred to as “P...
Views: 0
ORDER
In an order dated January 11, 2013, the court directed the parties to show cause why three legal issues in this case should not be decided in the manner described in that order. The parties’ show-cause briefing is now before the court. Based upon that briefing, and for the reasons that follow, this order resolves the issues described in the show-cause order largely along the lines propose...
Views: 0
*1268
ORDER
This case, brought pursuant to the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), involves a plan administrator’s termination of a plan claimant’s long term disability benefits. It is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Specifically pending are Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Company’s (“Hartford”) Dispositive Motion For Summary Judgment With S...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Defendant’s Motion for Disclosure of Sentencing Recommendation is denied for the following reasons.
I.
The Defendant’s Motion raises issues related to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 and the disclosure of (1) the probation officer’s sentencing recommendation, and (2) the probation officer’s rationale for making such a recommendation.
In the middle of the twentieth century, pro...
Views: 0
ORDER
At approximately 2:00 p.m. on September 29, 2009, Stephen Rousseau (“Rousseau”) and Michael Rosario (“Rosario”) (collectively “Defendants”) were transporting prisoners to various detention facilities in the State of Florida. One of the passengers was Tommy Lee Benton (“Benton”). It was a hot day, and the prisoners, including Benton, complained about the lack of ventilation in the stainles...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION
I. INTRODUCTION.
This action concerns the destruction of a gas turbine owned and operated by Plaintiff Maui Electric Company, Limited (“MECO”). MECO alleges that one of the high pressure turbine blades manufactured *1038by Defendant Chromalloy Gas Turbine, LLC, was faulty and caused more than $4 million in damages. MECO...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Joanne Davis (“Davis”), brings this action against Defendants Jackson County Municipal Court Judge Mark T. Musick (“Judge Musick”) and Wesley Skaggs (“Skaggs”) (collectively “Defendants”). Plaintiff asserts various federal and state causes of action including failure to pay overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”) and the O...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
The issue before the Court is whether John Blaylock (hereinafter “Blaylock”), counsel for Defendant Eduardo Lucio (hereinafter “Lucio” or “Defendant”), may remain as defense counsel in the above-styled cause. Having reviewed the facts and the applicable law, the Court finds that an actual conflict between Blaylock’s personal interests and those of his client Lucio exi...
Views: 1
Page 58203
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WILLARD T. KING, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-319 (CKK)
ERIC HIMPTON HOLDER, JR., Attorney
General, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING THE MARCH 4, 2013, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 27)
ORDER GRANTING MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT’S MOTION TO REMAND (Doc. 13)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Merced Irrigation District (“MID”) filed a declaratory relief action against the County of Mariposa (“Mariposa”) in Merced County Superior Court on September 5, 2012. On October 5, 2012, Mariposa removed Plaintiffs declaratory re...
Views: 0
*1193Order Granting Motion of Plaintiff Kenneth J. Rader, Jr., to Remand
Plaintiff Kenneth J. Rader (“Rader”) filed his complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, alleging claims against Defendant Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (“Sun Life”) for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing with regard to his group disability insura...
Views: 0
*1016ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Julian Gonzales (“Gonzales”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review of the final decision by the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying his claims for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. Presently b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ motions to dismiss for insufficient service of process. (Docs. 4, 6, 9.) *323This case concerns Ms. Jacqueline Rice’s employment discrimination claims against a hotel and the security firm the hotel contracted to provide services. Defendants’ Motions present three issues before the Court.
The first issue is whether serv...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [# 37], GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [# 47], DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO REINSTATE THE PLAINTIFFS’ RETIREE HEALTHCARE COVERAGE IN EFFECT UNTIL 2012, FINDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE [# 59] MOOT AND CANCELLING APRIL 25, 2013 HEARING
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 15, 2011, Plaintiffs, Ronald Strait and Danny O. St...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case concerns a credit card processing system that allegedly failed to process certain transactions. Defendant *540Dydacomp Development Corporation (“Dydacomp”) moves to dismiss Plaintiff Stockroom, Inc.’s (“Stockroom”) second amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The Court decides the motion without oral argument under Federal...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
DAVID HARVEY, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING IN PART AND DISMISSING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS
THE MATTER was referred to the Honorable Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes, United States Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (D.E. No. 16), filed on July 10, 2012. The Magistrate Judge filed a Re*1308port and Recommendation (D.E. No. 54) on Febru...
Views: 0
OPINION This cause is before the Court on the Motion for Evidentiary Sanctions Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 (Motion for Sanctions) (d/e 201) filed by Plaintiffs United States of America and the States of California, Illinois, North Carolina, and Ohio. The Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant’s conduct during discovery has been, at times, evasive, obstructive, a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION In July 2010 plaintiff Rudolph A. Buckley, M.D. (“plaintiff’ or “Buckley”) filed this action in the Supreme Court, Oneida County, against defendant Slocum-Dickson Medical Group (“Slocum-Dickson” or “defendant”) asserting a state law breach of contract claim regarding severance benefits (“First Cause of Action”) and seeking declaratory judgment (“Seco...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
INTRODUCTION
This case concerns the constitutionality of a county jail’s inmate mail policies. Defendants Columbia County, the Columbia County Sheriffs Office (the “CCSO”), and Sheriff Jeffrey Dickerson (collectively “Defendants”) operate the county jail in Columbia County, Oregon (the “Jail”). Plaintiff Prison Legal News (“PLN”) alleges that Defendants vio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Cincinnati Public Schools’ Motion to Dismiss (doc. 6), Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition (doc. 7), and Defendants’ Reply (doc. 8). For the reasons indicated herein, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion.
*886I. Background
The state of Ohio enacted legislation, H.B. 190, effective November 14, 2007, which amended Ohio law to require cri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Now before the Court is petitioner Reginald Baugham’s pro se Motion [646] to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Upon consideration of petitioner’s pro se Motion [646], the Government’s Opposition [658], the entire record herein, the applicable law, and for the reasons set forth below, petitioner’s motion will be denied. 1. BACKGROUND Petitione...
Views: 0
Page 58710
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Valeria Nunez Cruz brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. The Commissioner moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c), and Cruz has cross-moved for...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company L.L.C. (“Ritz-Carlton Company”), The Ritz-Carlton Management Company, L.L.C. (“Ritz-Carlton Management”), Marriott International, Inc. (“Marriott”), and Dilido Beach Hotel Corporation (“Dilido” and collectively with the other defendants, “Defendants[’]”) Motion to Dismiss. The Court ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On December 14, 2011, Damaris Acevedo-Torres (“Plaintiff’) filed this action against the Municipality of Arecibo (“Defendant”), alleging sexual harassment and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., and Puerto Rico Law 100 of June 30, 1959 (“Law 100”), P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 29, §§ 146 et seq. The court previ...
Views: 0
OPINION
*442
Table of Contents
Background.....................................................................443
I. Facts...............................................................443
A. Overview of Standing Instruction Trading..........................444
B. Representations About Standing Instruction Pricing.................444
1. Best Execution...............................................
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEY FEES
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Reeouvreur has filed two separate motions seeking award of attorney fees in the total amount of $77,765.25. The first seeks fees incurred as a result of service attempts and time spent on the attorney fee motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d)(2), and the second seeks fees as a prevailing party under...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Cheryl E. Krum has filed an action against Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (Hartford) in which she alleges that her long-term disability benefits were inappropriately denied her by Hartford in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The matter is now before the court on Ms. Krum’s Motion for Summary Judgment ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal Action No. 12-270-7 (JEB)
RONALD CRAIG SPEIGHT,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Indicted with six others for conspiracy to distribute heroin, D...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
JOAN WADELTON et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Shaka O’Christopher Johnson brings this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Johnson has been detained by the Bureau of *399Immigration and Customs Enforcement (the “ICE”) since January 18, 2012, pending a final determination of his removal proceedings. Johnson petitions this Court to order his immediate release from custody or, in the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is defendant Jose Lopez Diaz’s motion for a judgment of acquittal and for a new trial, (Docket No. 350), defendant Carlos Lopez Diaz’s motion for a judgment of acquittal, (Docket No. 351), and defendant Carlos Lopez Diaz’s motion for a new trial, (Docket No. 352). For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES both defendants’ motion for a judgment of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Daniel Virtue worked a series of jobs -with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters from October 2000 to January 2007. As a result of his service with the IBT, his local union, and as a rank-and-file Teamster, he was eligible to participate in at least four Teamsters-affiliated pension plans. When Virtue also sought to participate in the IBT’s Family Protection P...
Views: 0
Page 59140
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“LBHI”) brings this suit against Defendant Gateway Funding Diversified Mortgage Services, L.P. (“Gateway”), involving home mortgage loans. Both Lehman and Gateway have filed motions for summary judgment.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In August 2001, Arlington Capital Mortgage Corporation (“Arlington”), a mortgage origination company, entered into a Lo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Ann Paulissen, brings this action against defendant, MEI Technologies, Inc., for hostile work environment, retaliation, and wrongful discharge based on age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Plaintiff seeks to recover actual, exemplary, and liquidated damages, as well as attorney’s fees, costs of court...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
CAROLINA ZALDUONDO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
PRELIMINARY SENTENCING MEMORANDUM This case has returned to the Court after making its way through the First Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. A major part of the sentence imposed by this Court on Defendant Southern Union Company (“Southern Union”) was vacated by the Supreme Court, and the case was remanded for resentencing. The parties have several important question...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff UnitedHealth Group Inc. (“United”) brought this coverage action against ten insurance companies — United’s primary insurer (Lexington Insurance Company or “Lexington”) and nine of United’s excess insurers — asking this Court to determine, with respect to each of *1032several dozen claims that were brought against United during the period December 1, 1998, through December 1, 2000,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS BRUCE OTTO AND CRYSTAL SEED POTATO COMPANY’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendants Bruce Otto (hereafter “Otto”) and Crystal Seed Potato Company, Inc.’s (hereafter “Crystal Seed”) motion for dismissal and for summary judgment (Docs. # 135, 138). Otto contends that he should be dismissed as an individual defendant ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Keweenaw Bay Indian Community has filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. Defendants Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services; Yvette Roubideaux, Director of the Indian Health Services, and United States of America argue that the motion should be denied as futile, because the proposed second amended complaint raises claims that pl...
Views: 0
Page 59352
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (R. Doc. 31) and Defendant’s Motion to Strike Exhibit A to Plaintiffs’ Response Memorandum in Opposition (R. Doc. 36). For the following reasons, the Motion to Strike is DENIED and the Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
I. Factual Background
AGEM Management Services, LLC (“AGEM”), Bruno Wink...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MÍOTION FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION, DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS, AND GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE
This is a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Ghilotti Bros., Inc. (“Ghilotti”), a construction company, failed to provide proper meal and rest periods, failed to provide accurate wage statements, and did not pay overtime and minimum wages owed on accou...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On April 2, 2012, Rozik and Vartan Keshish filed this action against Allstate Insurance Company, alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, elder abuse, violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”).1 The parties thereafter stipulated t...
Views: 0
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Named Plaintiffs Gloria Stitt, Ronald Stitt, Judi Shatzer, Mark Zirlott, and Terri Louise Zirlott filed a Class Action Complaint against Defendants Citibank, N.A. and CitiMortgage, Inc. (collectively, “Citi” or “Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 1-1.) Plaintiffs allege Citi engaged in fraudulent practices by charging marked-up or unne...
Views: 0
Order Denying Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs initiated this class action on February 10, 2012 concerning fraudulent practices in connection with the servicing of their home mortgage loans. (Dkt. No. 1.) After a previous round of motions, the Court ordered that claims against each of the three groups of defendants be severed into three separate actions. (Dkt. No. 59.) Thereafter, Named P...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on plaintiffs motion to remand and defendant Joseph Stephan Farrell’s motion to dismiss. For the reasons discussed below, both motions are granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
This action was originally filed in Wake County Superior Court and was removed by defendant Joseph Stephan Farrell (J.S. Farrell) to this Court on November 15, 2012. WJ ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff North American Olive Oil Association (“NAOOA”) brings this action against defendant Kangadis Food Inc., doing business as The Gourmet Factory (“Kangadis”), asserting claims for false advertising under the Lanham Act and for deceptive acts and practices and false advertising under New York General Business Law §§ 349 and 350. Plaintiff alleges that Kangadis has falsel...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DAVID A. HORN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. 12-2041 (ESH)
...
Views: 0
ORDER ON RULE 35 MOTION I Preliminary Statement The Government has filed a motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b)(1) asking the Court to reduce the sentences of five defendants who were convicted and sentenced for offering or taking bribes to secure Navy contract work. This isn’t the first time the Government has asked the Court to reduce these defendants’ sentences. The prosecutors filed a motion under...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Angel Diaz-Colon (“Plaintiff’) brought this case against Hector Diaz, Emilio Diaz-Colon, Laiza Vazquez, Carlos Ortiz-Cordero, and several John Does labeled in the complaint as “Individuals A through J” (collectively “Defendants”). For the following reasons, the court DISMISSES this case pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(m) and 41(b). I. Timeline of Events Plaintiff...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: B-K LIGHTING’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF VALIDITY AND FRESNO VALVES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY; FRESNO VALVES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NO INFRINGEMENT
This is a patent dispute between B-K Lighting, Inc. (“B-K”) and Fresno Valves & Castings, Inc. (“FVC”). On May 23, 2008, the court granted FVC’s motion for summary judgment of invalidity, finding the patent-in-...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Goldie and Shantel Brown commenced this action in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas against C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (collectively, “Bard”). Bard subsequently removed the case to this Court, prompting the Browns to file a motion to remand. For the reasons that follow, the Court denies the motion.
Background
In their complaint, the Browns seek med...
Views: 0
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion in Limine (Doc. 52) and Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 53). Plaintiff filed Responses in opposition to both Motions (Docs. 55 & 56).1 For the reasons stated below, both Motions are denied in part and granted in part.
Background 2
On July 30, 2011, a semi-tractor trailer driven by Defendant Robert Austin collide...
Views: 0
Page 59849
OPINION & ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
On March 14, 2013, this Court heard oral argument with respect to pending Motions for Class Certification in three separate actions that assert claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, including this action. In addition, the parties have extensively briefed the motions. For the reasons that follow, the Court shall DEN...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 14, 2013, this Court heard oral argument with respect to pending Motions for Class Certification in three separate actions that assert claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, including this action. In addition, the parties extensively *305briefed the motions. In an Order issued on March 27, 2013, this Court denied Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
The plaintiff, Larry Anderson (“Anderson”), claims that his former employer, Georgia-Pacific Wood Products, LLC (“Georgia-Pacific”), is liable for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., as amende...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This diversity matter2 is before the Court on United Fire & Casualty Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 141) and Spain, Miller and Spain, LLC and James E. Spain’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 150).3 These motions are fully briefed and ready for disposition.
BACKGROUND
Wayne Rockett sought defense and indemnification for claims made against him in a sui...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On February 26, 2013, Magistrate Judge Azrack held a bail hearing for Defendant Mohammad Ajmal Choudhry (“Defendant” or “Mr. Choudhry”). At the hearing, Magistrate Judge Azrack found that Defendant posed a danger to the community and a risk of flight and accordingly ordered him detained on an order of Detention Pending Trial dated and filed on February 26, 2013. Dkt. Nos. 3...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before this Court is Petitioner Yetbarek Yohannes Tesfay’s (“Tesfay”) Motion for Order Amending Naturalization Certificate (Doc. # 19), filed on January 11, 2013. Respondents Eric Holder, Alejandro Mayorkas, John Kramer, and Janet Napolitano (“Respondents”) filed a Response (Doc. #20) on February 14, 2013. Tesfay filed a Reply (Doc. # 21) on March 14, 2013.
I. BACKGROUND
Tesfay al...
Views: 0
Page 60080
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT is Relator’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Dkt. 21), to which Defendants have responded (Dkt. 22).1 Upon consideration, the Motion is DENIED.
I. Introduction
Barbara Schubert (“Relator”) brings this action under the qui tam provisions of the Federal False Claims Act and the Florida False Claims Act. On July 26, 2012, the United States filed notice of i...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Samuel Roberts, an employee of the University of Rochester (“UR”), brings this action seeking compensation for serious injuries he received during an experiment with a High Yield Neutron Temporal Diagnostic (colloquially referred to as the “light pipe,” after its most visible component) at the UR’s Laboratory for Laser Energetics (“LLE”) on August 6, 2008. While adj...
Views: 0
Page 60083
DECISION AND ORDER
Steven Kane (“Plaintiff’) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), claiming that the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”) improperly denied his application for Social Security disability insurance benefits. Plaintiff moves for an order reversing the Commissioner’s decision or, in the alternative, remanding his case back to the Commissioner for further proce...
Views: 0
Order re: Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims
This action arises out of Defendants’ marketing of a software program designed to run in conjunction with Plaintiffs online computer role-playing game. Plaintiff Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. (“Blizzard”) moves to dismiss the First Amended Counterclaims (“FACC”) asserted by Defendants Ceiling Fan Software, LLC (“CF”), Brian Becker (“Becker”),...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
James Marzano and John Majorek (“Plaintiffs”) bring this collective and class action against Proficio Mortgage Ventures, LLC, Proficio Bank, and First Liberty Financial Group, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.; the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“Illinois Wage Law”), 820 111. Comp. Stat...
Views: 1
ORDER RE STIPULATION TO VACATE THE COURT’S JUNE 11, 2012 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS 1. That the June 11, 2012 Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs’ Motion for Terminating Sanctions (“June 11, 2012 Order”) is vacated and that it may not be cited for any purpose.1 2. That plaintiffs will not seek any special instruction or...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant’s motions for summary judgment (Docket Nos. 76 and 79) and to exclude expert testimony (Docket No. 82) were denied by a Court Order entered on April 8, 2013, “with memorandum and order to follow.” The Court now publishes the subject memorandum and order.
I. Background
Plaintiff WBIP, LLC (“-WBIP”) filed suit against defendant Kohler Co. (“Kohler”) in March, 2011, alleging infringe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS, GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE, AND DENYING LEAVE TO AMEND
These matters come before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs second amended complaint. Dkt. # 45. Plaintiff Torey Gragg alleges that defendants Orange Cab Company, Inc. and Ridecharge, Inc. violated three consumer protection statutes. The c...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation’s Motion (# 65) to Find that Punitive Damages Are Unavailable and/or to Apply New Jersey Law to the Issue of Punitive Damages. For the reasons that follow, the Court concludes New Jersey law applies to the issue of punitive damages, and, as a result, punitive damages are unavailable in this matt...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Edwin Toledo-Colon (“Plaintiff’) brought this action against the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (the “Commonwealth”), the Puerto Rico Department of Labor and Human Resources (“DOL”), the Puerto Rico Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the Vocational Rehabilitation Administration (“VRA”), and individual defendants1 in their personal and official ca*237pacities (collectively “Defendants...
Views: 0
ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS TO ALLOW FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY
For the following reasons, the Court STAYS proceedings in this action and in the underlying arbitrations, so that the parties may undertake limited discovery as to whether the original parties to the leases either (1) intended to permit consolidation or (2) later amended their agreements to permit consolidation.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Lesse...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Customers Bank, Ryan Shofield, Paula Diane Peyton, Ellen Frank, Theresa Derby, Kelly Doyle, Jason Raysor, Edwina Monaghan, and Kim Crayton (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed the instant action against the following eighteen defendants on May 4, 2012: 1) the Municipality of Norristown (“Norristown”); 2) the Solicitor for Norristown, Sean Kilkenny; 3) Code Enforcement Department Superviso...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the court is Plaintiff Elizabeth Holmes’s (“Holmes”) Motion to Remand. Holmes seeks remand to state court on the ground that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the parties are not completely diverse. Having reviewed the pending motion, the submissions of the parties, the pleadings, and the applicable law, the court is of the opinion that reman...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Khalil Fareed was to be a witness in a landlord-tenant lawsuit scheduled for a hearing in the Thirty-Sixth District Court in Detroit, Michigan on May 4, 2012. He was wearing a kufi, which is a head covering commonly worn by Muslims as a religious observance, when he attempted t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
LAMONT PEETE, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the parties’ cross motions for judgment on the pleadings (DE 21, 24).1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), United States Mágistrate Judge William A. Webb entered a memorandum and recommendation (“M & R”) (DE 26) wherein he recommends that the court deny plaintiffs motion, grant defendant’s motion, and uphold the ...
Views: 0
OPINION This case concerns plaintiffs’ claims that they suffered damages as a result of plaintiff Frank Marenbach’s fall on the street in Margate City, New Jersey. Presently before the Court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment, as well as defendant’s request for sanctions against plaintiffs. For the reasons expressed below, defendant’s summary judgment motion will be granted, and defendant’...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on a motion for summary judgment brought by defendant ADT Security Services, Inc. (“ADT”). For the reasons that follow, the court grants in part and denies in part ADT’s motion.
I. BACKGROUND
On April 26, 2012, plaintiff Thomas Bah-ringer filed a civil complaint against ADT in the Court of Common Pleas for Charleston County. ADT removed the action to this c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On October 11, 2012, a thirty-two count superseding indictment was filed in the Northern District of New York charging defendants Timothy M. McGinn (“McGinn”) and David L. Smith (“Smith”) (collectively “defendants”) each with twenty-nine federal crimes. Counts 1 through 26 charged both defendants with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud (Count 1...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiff Lakeview Collection Inc. (“Lakeview”) and defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank”),1 executed three separate agreements related to a real estate development project. Lakeview purchased property from the Bank intending to redevelop it into a mixed-use complex where the Bank would then operate a bank branch. This sale was memorialized as the Purchase Agreement...
Views: 0
Page 60458
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Elliott D. Allen filed this action seeking review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) denying his applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (SSA). 42 U.S.C. §§ 416, 423(d), 1381a. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NEW ENGLAND DEACONESS HOSPITAL,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-1787 (BAH)
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Judge Beryl A. Howell
in her official capacity as U.S. Secr...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LARRY BERKE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1347 (ESH)
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal No. 01-17 (CKK)
JOHN Q WESLEY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(April 29, 2013)
Defendant John Q. We...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Regarding Deposition and to Compel Certain Discovery (DE 40) which was referred to United States Magistrate Judge, Lurana S. Snow. The motion is ripe for consideration. This is a diversity action arising out of a slip and fall which occurred in the Defendant, Ross’ Lauderdale Lakes store. The Plaintiff seeks an or...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court upon Plaintiff Branch Banking and Trust Company’s Amended Motion for Final Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law (DE 196).1 Defendant Richard Bellinger responded. (DE 197). Plaintiff replied. (DE 202). The Court has considered the briefs of the parties and the record, and is otherwise advised in the premises.
I. Background
The rele...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), by plaintiffs Jerry S. Estep and Amber Estep against defendant Manly Deas Kochalski, LLC, an Ohio law firm. Plaintiffs allege that on March 29, 2011, defendant filed a complaint in foreclosure against them on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., in the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County,...
Views: 0
Page 60746
ORDER
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3). [docket #21], For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted.
FACTS
In November 2009 Mass Engineered Design, Inc., a Canadian corporation, and Jerry Moscovitch, Mass’ president, sued 30 defendants in the Eastern District of Texas. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Petitioner AXA Versieherung AG (“AXAV”) filed this action on August 6, 2012, against respondents New Hampshire Insurance Company, American Home Assurance Company, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (collectively, “AIG”), petitioning for confirmation of an arbitration award. On consent of the parties, this Court issued an order confirming the a...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Aaron Luckette (“Luckette”) brings this action against his former employer, F.M. Howell & Co., Inc. and Howell, Liberatore & Associates, Inc. (“HLA”), formerly known as Howell, Liberatore & Wickham, alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and the taking of FMLA leave, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq....
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This action arises out of a landlord-tenant dispute in connection with a shopping mall in Dallas, Texas. While a court in Rochester, New York might seem an unlikely place to hear a dispute concerning property in Texas, it is well established that “[p]arties can consent to personal jurisdiction through forum-selection clauses in contractual agreements.” D.H. Blair & Co., Inc. ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Eric Beckman, Steve Bunch, Jeri Griffin, Ivana Harrington, Jack Leiva, Teri Parke, Thomas Walker, Pete Wiseman, Renee Braun, Elizabeth Scott, Veronica Morgan, and Theresa Forrest (together, “Plaintiffs”) are individuals who worked as Relationship Managers (RMs) for Defendant KeyBank, N.A (“KeyBank” or “Defendant”). On October 19, 2012, Plaintiffs comme...
Views: 0
ORDER
Introduction
On March 20, 2013, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiff S Bar B Ranch Inc.’s (S Bar B) Motion to Certify Class (Doc. 35). At that hearing, the parties agreed that the Court ought to decide Defendant Omimex Canada, Ltd.’s (Omimex) Motion for Summary Judgment on Statute of Limitations and Laches (Doc. 38) before deciding the certification motion. The Court finds Omimex’s argumen...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judg*1123ment on All Claims (Dkt. 12) and on Plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 17). Defendants’ request for oral argument is not necessary and should be denied. The court has reviewed the relevant record and the remainder of the file herein.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On M...
Views: 0
Page 60939
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant John M. McHugh, Secretary of the Army’s (“Army”) motion to dismiss (Dkt. 5). The Court has considered the pleadings filed in support of and in opposi*1140tion to the motion and the remainder of the file and hereby grants the motion for the reasons stated herein.
I.PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On October 15, 2012, P...
Views: 0
ORDER:
1. Certifying a Class and Subclass for Purposes of Settlement;
2. Granting Final Approval of the Proposed Settlement;
3. Approving the Requested Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; and
4. Approving the Requested Incentive Awards for Plaintiffs Cox, Hall,
and Lynch.
On November 20, 2012, the Court issued an order preliminarily certifying a class and subclass for settlement purposes, grantin...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before this Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Counts III, IV, and V of Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. 9), and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Defendants Michael W. Lovell, Stacy P. Lovell, Jean Chicken, John Doe Chicken (hereinafter “individual defendants”), and Fictitious Defendants (Doc. 10). Plaintiff has filed a consolidated Response (Doc. 14), and Defendants have filed a consoli...
Views: 1
Page 60968
ORDER AFFIRMING ORDERS OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT
In these consolidated appeals, Attorney Albert M. Kun (“Kun”) appeals from the orders of the bankruptcy court dismissing the bankruptcy cases and requiring disgorgement of attorney’s fees. The United States Trustee filed an answering brief and Kun filed a reply brief in each appeal. The court determines that the matter is suitable for decision withou...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1113 (JDB)
MIKE POOL, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case concerns the Burea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is a Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 24], filed by the defendant, Kanawha Insurance Company (“Kanawha”). The motion is opposed by the plaintiffs, Carmen Malbrough and Lionel Simon [Docs. 30, 35]. Kanawha then filed a Reply [Doc. 37], Also before the court is a Motion to Continue Kanawha’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Allow Discovery [Doc. 27], filed by th...
Views: 1
memorandum: and order
Presently before this Court is the question of the appropriate remedy for a legal deficiency in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (“SEIS”) the Forest Service prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) for the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (also referred to as the “2004 Framework” or the “SNFPA”).
On appeal of this Court’s mer...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Kelly E. Tubman brings suit against Defendant USAA Casualty Insurance Company (“USAA”) for breach of contract (Count I), violation of statutory bad faith (Count II), breach of fiduciary duty (Count III), breach of common law bad faith (Count IV), and violation of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (Count V). USAA moves to dismiss Counts III th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Counsel for respondent Warden Rick Harrington in this 28 U.S.C. § 22542 habe-as case, having sought and received an extension of time to file a response to the pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) brought pro se by Gilberto . Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”), has now timely filed a motion to dismiss the Petition as itself untimely. This memorandum opinion and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company’s (“MassMutual” or “Plaintiff’) Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”). (Doc. No. 27.) After considering the Motion, all responses thereto, and the applicable law, the Court finds that Plaintiffs Motion should be GRANTED.1
I. BACKGROUND
This dispute involves two life insurance policies issued ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 15) filed by Defendants L.P. Walker (“Walker”), O.V. Chavez1 (“Chavez”), and Kevin Murphy (“Murphy”) (collectively, “Defendants”) on January 28, 2013. The Court has reviewed the submissions of the parties and finds that, for the reasons set forth below, the Defendants’ motion is due to be GRA...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This dispute arises out of a license agreement under which defendant paid royalties to plaintiff for the right to use a treatment developed by plaintiffs predecessors. In a parallel proceeding, defendant sued plaintiff in Maryland state court seeking a declaration that it had no continuing obligations under the license agreement. Pending before the Court is defendant’s motion t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The plaintiff, Stephen P. Troy, Jr. (“Troy”), brings this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. section 146 (“Section 146”), seeking judicial review of a final decision and order (the “Decision”) of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the “Board”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “PTO”) in Patent Interference No. 105,698. The interferenc...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Defendant Lisa Jackson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), moves to dismiss Zen-Noh’s claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the following reasons, the EPA’s motion is GRANTED.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (“LDEQ”) issued permits for the Nucor facility in Convent, Louisiana to manufacture pig iron ...
Views: 0
ENTRY AND ORDER RESOLVING OBJECTIONS TO THE PRESENTENCE REPORT. Pending before the Court are Defendant’s objections to a Presentence Report. The Presentence Report states: In regard to Counts 1 and 46, the parties stipulated, as a part of the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) agreement, that Daoud would pay a $125,000 forfeiture money judgment in lieu of restitution. Daoud satisfied the money judgment on November ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss [DE 29] filed on June 5, 2012. Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition [DE 37] on July 3, 2012. Defendants replied [DE 38] on July 10, 2012. In light of extrinsic evidence submitted by Defendants with their motion to dismiss, the Court converted the motion into one for summ...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Terence Taylor (“Taylor”) filed a first amended complaint (the “First Amended Complaint”) against defendants Westor Capital Group (“Westor”), Jonathan Leinwand (“Leinwand”), and Richard Bach (“Bach,” and collectively, the “Westor Defendants”) asserting violations of Securities Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 (“Rule 10b-5”), and Securities Exchange Act § 20(a) (“Section 20(a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On October 10, 2012, the Plaintiff Office-max Incorporated (“OMI”) commenced this action against the Defendant Richard Cinotti (“Cinotti”), asserting claims for violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030, and breach of his duty of loyalty. On November 15, 2012, Cinotti filed his Answer with several Counterclaims, including a claim for defamat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff Altagracia Diaz (“the Plaintiff’), on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, commenced this action against the Defendant Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (“the Defendant” or “RCS”) for alleged unlawful credit and collection practices engaged in by the Defendant in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Following the court’s Memorandum Decision and Order dated May 18, 2012 (the “Order”) [Dkt. No. 73] denying Defendant’s request for a Franks hearing, Defendant moved the court to reopen the issue and reconsider granting Defendant a Franks hearing. (Def.’s Mot. Re-open Ev. Hrg. [Dkt. No. 74] and Def.’s Renewed Mot. for Franks Hrg. [Dkt. No. 94].) Defendant also filed a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The petitioner, Christian Melendez, brings this pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After a jury trial, the petitioner was convicted of two counts of burglary in the first degree in violation of New York State Penal Law §§ 140.30(2) and 140.30(4), one count of burglary in the second degree in violation of New York State Penal Law...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendants’ Motion to Compel Return of Inadvertently Pro*1242duced Documents and Memorandum in Support. (Dkt. # 54). Defendants’ motion seeks the return of twenty documents that they claim are privileged and were inadvertently disclosed to plaintiffs. Id. Because defendants’ motion did not specify that the parties had conferred before the motion was filed, ...
Views: 0
Page 61748
ORDER Pending before the Court are the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. (Docs. 18 and 21). For the reasons below, the cross motions for summary judgment will be granted in part and denied in part. The Court will affirm the ALJ’s decision that the District committed a substantive IDEA violation, reverse the ALJ’s decision that the District committed a procedural IDEA violation, and orde...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Petitioners CIMC Raffles Offshore (Singapore) Ltd. and Yantai CIMC Raffles Offshore Ltd. (collectively, “CIMC”), two offshore oil rig construction yards, constructed two semi-submersible drilling vessels for respondents Baerfield Drilling LLC (“BDL”) and Soratu Drilling LLC (“SDL”). See Supp. Decl. of Nwamaka G. Ejebe filed Feb. 15, 2013, Ex. 1 (Final *427Award of Arbitrators). ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are David Efron’s motion to intervene under Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2) (Docket # 198), and the parties’ response thereto. Dockets # 199 & 200. After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, Efron’s motion to intervene is DENIED.
Factual and Procedural Background
A comprehensive recitation of the procedural and factual background of this diversity tort suit case ...
Views: 1
Page 61814
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court are a Partial Motion for Summary Judgment from the plaintiff, Southwest Louisiana Hospital Association (“Hospital”) [Doc. 40] filed on January 22, 2013, and a Motion for Summary Judgment from the defendant, BASF Construction Chemicals, LLC (“BASF”) [Doc. 41], filed on January 22, 2013. BASF timely filed an opposition to the Hospital’s motion [Doc. 44] as did t...
Views: 0
Page 61825
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND REMANDING FOR IMMEDIATE AWARD OF BENEFITS
BEFORE THE COURT are cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 13, 19. Attorney Kenneth Isserlis represents Cindy Lee Tully (Plaintiff); Special Assistant United States Michael S. Howard represents the Commissioner of Social Security (Defendant). The parties have consented to proceed before a ma...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO DISMISS; GRANTING MOTION TO BIFURCATE AND STAY DISCOVERY
This case is before the Court on three defendants’ motions to dismiss (two of which are identical) and a motion to bifurcate and stay discovery. Plaintiff craigslist, Inc. (“Craigslist”) has brought seventeen claims against three companies and one individual — 3taps, Inc. (“3Taps”); Pad-...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS; DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE
This action involves the alleged false imprisonment of Kirby Martensen (“Plaintiff’) by William Koch (“Defendant”) and other unnamed parties. Now pending before the Court are Defendant’s motions to (1) dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (i) under Rule 12(b)(3) for imprope...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, John Byars, has brought suit against Defendants, the School District of Philadelphia (“School District”), the School Reform Commission (“SRC”) and numerous School District employees,1 alleging various causes of action arising from events and ensuing publicity surrounding the School District’s award of a $7.5 million contract for the installation of security cameras...
Views: 0
*1310 ORDER AND OPINION The above civil action is before the Court on defendants’ renewed motion for summary judgment, entitled Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment On Plaintiffs First Amendment Claim [112]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [112] is GRANTED. BACKGROUND...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Early in the morning of February 13, 2010, the McMinnville police stopped a car in which Hipólito Aranda was a passenger. About thirty minutes into the stop, a McMinnville police officer approached Aranda, forced him to the ground, and repeatedly punched Aranda in the face and back while attempting to place him in handcuffs. A Yamhill County deputy sheriff also struck Aranda rep...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 35) and Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (ECF No. 52). For the reasons stated herein, Defendants’ Motion is denied, and Plaintiffs Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. BACKGROUND
Defendant City of Chicago (the “City”) employed Plaintiff police officers as Securit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on two motions relating to a November 16, 2012 arbitration award. Plaintiff moves to vacate the award (Doc. I),1 and defendant moves to affirm it (Doc. 12). For the following reasons, the court affirms the arbitration award and enters judgment accordingly.
I. Factual Background
In February 2001, the parties entered into a Strategic Alliance A...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Intervenor-defendant Center for Individual Freedom (“CFIF”) has moved for leave to amend and supplement its answer so that it can bring three cross-claims against defendant Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) to be heard if the regulation challenged in this action is invalidated. CFIF Mot. and Mem. for Leave to File Am. and Supp. Ans. and Cross-Claims [Dkt. # 81]. Both plainti...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter comes before the court on Defendant Ahmed Muse Salad’s Motion for Continuance (“Motion”), ECF No. 589, filed on March 22, 2013. The Motion, which co-Defendants Abukar Osman Beyle and Shani Nurani Sheikh Abrar do not join,1 asks the court to delay the trial for six to twelve months. Salad requests this time to develop evidence in support of his claim that his intelle...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Debra Brown brought suit against her former employer, Defendant Humana Insurance Company (“HIC”), claiming that HIC acted improperly during the course of her employment because of her health condition. Specifically, Brown advances two claims: (1) HIC discriminated against her on the basis of her perceived disability, in violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter was considered by the Court in a bench trial held on April 8, 2013 (Doc. No. 67), as well as on the submission of the Administrative Record (Joint Exhibit 1; Doc. No. 40-1-40-10), the Joint Final Pretrial Statement (Doc. No. 53, jointly filed by the parties on Mar. 6, 2013), and the parties’ respective Trial Briefs (Doc. No. 58, filed by Plainti...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiffs Motion to Remand, filed September 11, 2012. After carefully reviewing the motion and brief, response and brief, reply, record, and applicable law, the court grants Plaintiffs Motion to Remand and remands this action to the County Court at Law No. 1, Dallas County, Texas.
I. Background
On August 14, 2012, Patricia Vinson (“Vinson” or “P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On October 15, 2010, Plaintiff Keon Blake attended a dance at McKinley Technology High School in Washington, where he was a student. Defendant Securitas Security Services, Inc., a private contractor, was engaged to provide security for the dance. Some time that evening, after smoking what he believed to be marijuana, Blake jumped or fell from a third-floor balcony at the scho...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND:
On March 1, 2012, plaintiff, Rox-Ann Reifer (hereinafter “Reifer”), as assignee of Donald Russo, Esquire, filed a complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania. On March 23, 2012, defendant, Westport Insurance Corporation (hereinafter ‘West-port”) removed the case to the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Def.’s Notice of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. The Court has re*568viewed the record and deems a hearing unnecessary. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Kimberly Crockett is an African-American female who resides in Maryland. Defendant SRA International is an international corpo...
Views: 0
ORDER
The above-captioned action is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration Regarding Motion to Strike “Rebuttal” Expert for Defendant [59] (“Motion to Reconsider”). Plaintiffs Motion to Reconsider asks the Court to reconsider its denial of Plaintiffs earlier-filed Motion to Strike Rebuttal Expert for Defendant [19] (“Motion to Strike”). For the reasons stated below, the Court...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62112: Paleteria La Michoacana, Inc. v. Productos Lacteos Tocumbo S.A. de C.V.
Page 62112
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Denying Prolacto’s Motion for a Protective Order; Granting Prolacto’s Motion to Seal; Overruling as Moot PLM’s Objections to Evidence
Re Document Nos.: 70, 72, 75
I. INTRODUCTION
The parties in this matter claim the exclusive right to use various trademarks in connection with the sale of their food products, including ice cream and fruit popsicles, in the United States. The d...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On March, 16, 2012, the plaintiffs, Mitel Networks Corporation (“Mitel Networks”) and Mitel (Delaware), Inc. (“Mitel Delaware”) (collectively, “Mitel” or “the plaintiffs”), initiated the instant action against Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”). (D.I. 1.) The plaintiffs allege infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,940,834 (“the '834 Patent”) and 7,292,685 (“the '685 Pat...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION AFFIRMING FINAL DECISION OF BANKRUPTCY COURT This is an appeal from the Bankruptcy Court’s1 entry of summary judgment determining the validity and an amount of a legal claim against the Debtor, Try Us, LLC. Debtor and the Trustee of the bankruptcy estate appeal, contending the Bankruptcy Court lacked authority under Article III of the Constitution to render a decision. The Cour...
Views: 2
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the following:
1. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b), Fed.R.Crim.P. (Doc. 33), filed October 3, 2012;
2. United States’ Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 37), filed October 18, 2012;
3. Defendant’s Supplemental Brief on Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 54), filed January 11, 2013; and
4. United States’ Supplemental Respo...
Views: 0
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT are Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 12) and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15). Because the undisputed evidence reveals that Markel International Insurance Company, Limited (“Markel”) wrongfully refused to defend and indemnify Neubert Aero Corp. (“Neubert”) in connection with certain underlying litigation brought by George Szczeklik and Marta ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
ABDUL GREENE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-109 (RWR)
)
JODY SHEGAN, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this multi-count criminal prosecution, the Government has charged Nader Mo-danlo with one count of obstructing an official proceeding (the “bankruptcy obstruction” charge). See 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c). It alleges that Modanlo lied to the Bankruptcy Court of this district about his relationship with a Swiss company, “Prospect Telecom AG.” Modanlo claims that since the Bankruptc...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 16), Plaintiffs opposition thereto (Rec. Doc. 20), and Defendant’s reply to same (Rec. Doc. 23). Defendant’s motion was set for hearing on Tuesday, April 16, 2013, on the briefs. The Court, having considered the motion and memoranda of counsel, the record, and the applicable law, finds that Defendant’s motio...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON PLAINTIFFS’ FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
I. Introduction
This is an action brought by the United States and the State of Wisconsin under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq., seeking, among other relief, an injunction requiring the defendant paper manufacturing and coating companies to comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Phillip Leshinsky brought this action against Defendants Telvent GIT, *436S.A. (“Telvent GIT”), Telvent Farradyne, Inc. (“Farradyne”), Telvent Caseta, Inc. (“Caseta”), Glenn Deitiker, and Alfredo Escriba (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging whistleblower claims under Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”), codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1514A(...
Views: 0
FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR'I`
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APR 2 3 2013
Glerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
?ourts for the Distrlct of Columbia
Raul C. Ramos, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 4
> l%~ 56‘£/
Eric H. Holder, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPlNION
This matter is before the Court on review of the plaintiff s pro se Complaint for
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiff iMedicor, Inc., commenced this action on March 28, 2011, in Supreme Court, Rockland County, asserting claims for breach of contract. On April 21, 2011, defendant timely removed the action to this Court The Court is in receipt of letters from plaintiffs counsel dated March 7, 2013, and April 12, 2013, which the Court deems as a motion for leave to file an amended co...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Ifeanyichukwu Eric Abakporo moves to dismiss Count One of the S2 Superseding Indictment. Abakporo also moves for inspection of the grand jury minutes and the production of previously demanded discovery.1 Defendant Latanya Pierce moves for severance from the trial of her co-defendant pursuant to Crawford v. Washington.2 Pierce also moves for: (1) a bill of particulars...
Views: 1
Page 62395
MEMORANDUM I. Background Petitioner James Alan Ross pro se filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, contesting the constitutionality of his Maryland state court conviction and sentence for four counts of first-degree assault. (Petition, ECF No. 1.) After receipt and review of the State’s response to the show-cause order, as well as supplemental filings by Ross, the Court issued a lengthy ...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is allowed for the following reasons.
I.
Plaintiff David Armato is a sex offender from the Chicago metropolitan area.1
Armato committed two theft offenses in Lake County, Illinois, in 2005 — one on May 7, 2005, and the other on December 30, 2005. He was convicted of the crimes in two separate cases in the Circuit Court of Lake County (Case Nos...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Patrick Tracy, on behalf of himself and a class of plaintiffs who have opted in, brings this action against defendant NVR, Inc. (“NVR”) pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (“FLSA”) and the New York Labor Law. Commenced in 2004, this matter presents claims for overtime compensation by and on behalf of Ryan Homes Sales and Marketing Represe...
Views: 0
Page 62412
OPINION AND ORDER CONFIRMING ARBITRATION AWARD
Marker Volkl (International) GmbH (“Marker Volkl”), a Swiss corporation, petitions pursuant to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, as codified in 9 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., (the “New York Convention” or “Convention”), to confirm the final arbitration award of November 6, 2012 (the “Final Award”), in its dispu...
Views: 0
*617
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant David Edmundo Munoz-Giron’s (“Defendant” or “Munoz-Giron”) Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (“Motion”). Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 13 (hereinafter, “Doc. 13”). On March 26, 2013, the Court convened a hearing and ruled from the bench. The Court GRANTED Defendant’s Motion and now issues this Opinion and Order setting forth t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Todd C. Bank (“Plaintiff’) initiated this action as a class action on his own behalf and on behalf of all persons to whose residential telephone lines Independence Energy Group LLC and/or Independence Energy Alliance LLC (“Defendants”) placed one or more telephone calls using an artificial or prerecorded voice to advertise. Defendants’ commercial goods or services (the “Clas...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS
This matter comes before the Court on Alfred Carlos Pott’s motion to compel (Dkt. #8), and intervenor Bentinicos de Argentina’s (“BDA”) motion to quash the subpoena, contained within its responsive memoranda (Dkt. # 19). For the reasons set forth below, the Court DEFERS the motion to compel and DENIES the motion to quash. BDA’s remaining motion is STRICKEN as MOOT (Dkt. # 15).
I....
Views: 0
ORDER
Having thoroughly reviewed Judge McCarthy’s Report and Recommendation, the parties’objections thereto, and the applicable law, this Court agrees with the Judge’s recommendation and finds in it no legal or factual error. As expressed in more detail at the status on March 25, 2013,
IT HEREBY IS ORDERED, that this Court accepts Judge McCarthy’s November 8, 2012 Report and Recommendation [35] i...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This suit arises out of the death of Daniel Wultz and the injuries of Yekutiel Wultz, suffered in a 2006 suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, Israel. Four members of the Wultz family brought suit against Bank of China (“BOC”), alleging acts of interna*455tional terrorism under the Antiterrorism Act (“ATA”),1 among other claims.
All of plaintiffs’ non-federal claims again...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
IVOR G. LUKE :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 12-00834 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Government obtained an arrest warrant for a physician based on a showing that he had issued thousands of prescriptions for highly addictive controlled substances to addicts and drug dealers in exchange for cash, continuing these illegal and dangerous practices even after learn*131ing of a DEA investigation into his activities and surrender of his controlled substances r...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE :
COMMISSION, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : Civil Action No. 09-1423 (GK)
:...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
In advance of the jury trial of Maria M. Ulloa on several counts of preparing and filing false or fraudulent income tax returns, see 18 U.S.C. § 287, the prosecution moved in limine to preclude various evidence from being used to impeach its witnesses. See L. Cr. R. 12.1(c). Specifically, it sought to exclude evidence of:
• a 2007 letter from United States Citizenship and Immig...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Memorandum Opinion addresses the Motion to Dismiss that Defendants Ourisman Chevrolet of Bowie, Inc., Henry Hylton, William Taliaferro, and Lew Gilinsky filed, ECF No. 5; Plaintiff Monica Sterling’s Opposition, ECF No. 12; and Defendants’ Reply, ECF No. 14. A hearing is not necessary. See Loe. R. 105.6. For the reasons stated herein, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED IN PART...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the court on the motions of defendants for summary judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiff John Hancock has responded in opposition to the motion, and the court, having considered the memoranda and submissions of the parties, concludes that the motion is well taken and should be granted. This is, inter alia, a § 1983 excessive force case arising out injurie...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT (D.E. 215)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (“Appellate Order,” D.E. 373). Before the Court for reconsideration pursuant to the Appellate Order is Defendant Marriott International, Inc.’s (“Marriott”) Motion to Dis...
Views: 0
OPINION
Christina Anderson (“Anderson”) filed this suit under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA”), alleging that she is a disabled person under that statute and that Defendants’ retail stores are public accommodations under the ADA which fail to comply with ADA standards by what she considered to be negatively disparate product placement and prici...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Thunder Basin Coal Company, L.L.C. seeks a declaratory judgment that defendant National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh is required to defend and indemnify it against a separate lawsuit, under an “additional insured” provision of a commercial umbrella policy. Thunder Basin was sued in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming for inju...
Views: 0
Page 62846
OPINION
This diversity suit arises out of an outbreak of Equine Herpes Virus — Type 1 (“EHV-1”) among certain thoroughbred horses stabled at Monmouth Park racetrack during the last months of 2006.1 The source of the infection was later traced back to a Canadian training facility, Adena Springs North, owned by Defendant The Alpen House.2 Plaintiffs ELR Corporation, and Deckert Enterprises, LLP # 2...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss and/or in the alternative motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Care Centers Management Consulting, Inc. (“CCMC”) pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6), and 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Court File No. 6). CCMC seeks dismissal, inter alia, because it contends it is not the aggrieved party’s “employer.” Plaintiff Equal Empl...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Loretha J. McCullough, brings this action against her former employer, Xerox Corporation (“Xerox”). McCullough alleges that Xerox discriminated against her on account of her race and sex, that Xerox retaliated against her for having opposed that discrimination, and that she has been denied equal pay for equal work, also on account of her race and sex.
Xerox has mov...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Dr. Daniel J. Ritacca and Ritacca Laser and Cosmetic Surgery Center, S.C. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) bring this action against Storz Medical, A.G. (“Storz”), Curamedix, and Stephen Nelson1 alleging common law fraud and consumer fraud in violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”), 815 111. Comp. Stat. 505/1 et seq. Presently...
Views: 0
Page 63031
ORDER
The plaintiff, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in North Carolina, seeks an injunction declaring that the defendant, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”), is without the authority “to require, conduct, or certify a union election on behalf of patient service technicians and patient center site coordinators employed by [the plaintiff] in Northern New Jerse...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On September 6, 2011, plaintiff filed an amended complaint against defendant Okuma asserting claims for negligence and strict product liability arising out of an incident in which plaintiff was injured while working on a machine manufactured by defendant. Now before me is defendant’s motion for summary judgment, which I deny for the reasons that follow. I. The follow...
Views: 0
Page 63092
MEMORANDUM OPINION A1 issue in this diversity suit to invalidate an inter vivos trust is whether the judicially-created probate exception to federal courts’ “virtually unflagging obligation ... to exercise the jurisdiction given them”1 operates to require dismissal of this suit. It does not. By Order dated March 5, 2013, dismissal on this ground was denied, and this memorandum opinion elucidates...
Views: 0
Page 63141
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
On April 10, 2013, the court held a hearing on defendant California Public Employees’ Retirement System’s (“CalPERS”) motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Plaintiff Kevan Arya appeared in pro per. D. Greg Valenza appeared for defendant. On review of the motion, the documents filed in support and opposition, on hearing...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on parties’ cross-motions for Summary Judgment:
(1) Defendant Commonwealth Trustees, LLC’s (“Commonwealth”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 85) as to Count VIII;
(2) Defendant Litton Loan Servicing, LP’s (“Litton”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 84) as to Counts I, II, and Count III1;
(3) Defendant Green Tree Servicing, LLC’s (“...
Views: 1
Page 63183
MEMORANDUM DECISION
I. INTRODUCTION
This case arises from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on July 3, 2006, near Blanding, Utah on State Route 191. Defendant Nicholas Parker, an employee of Defendant Aramark Sports and Entertainment Services, LLC, was driving a van with four other passengers, including Ms. Boyko, who were also off-duty Aramark employees on a shopping trip, when he lost cont...
Views: 0
Page 63206
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Axelrod & Chervény Architects, P.C. (“Axelrod”), David Salyards (“Salyards”), Architects Group Inc. (“AGI”), Country View Properties Development Corp. (“Country View”), and Winding Wood, Inc. (collectively, “plaintiffs”) commenced this action against defendants T. & S. Builders Inc. (“T & S”), Salvatore Malguarnera (“Malguarnera”), and Red Barn Estates, LLC. (“Red ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Defendant James J. Bulger (“Defendant” or “Bulger”) now moves to vacate the Memorandum and Order issued by the Court (Stearns, J.) on March 4, 2013 (“March 4th Memo & Order”), D. 856, regarding the government’s motion to resolve Bulger’s proffered claim of immunity prior to trial. Bulger has also asked this Court to vacate the Order issued by the Court (Stea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Kelly Carter filed this lawsuit against Thompson Hotels (“the hotel”) alleging race discrimination and retaliation while employed at Thompson’s SAX Chicago location, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq.1 Presently before the court is the hotel’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs amended comp...
Views: 0
On July 24, 2012, Plaintiff United States of America (“government”) filed a complaint [DE-1] in this court, asserting a claim pursuant to the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729, et seq., as well as state law claims of unjust enrichment and payment under mistake of fact against, among others, Defendants Valerie Jurik (“Jurik”) and At Home Assessments, LLC (“AHA”) (collectively, “Defendants”...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRENDA K. GARAY, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1207 (JEB)
OFFICER ANDERSON LIRIANO, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On April 14, 2010, Officers And...
Views: 1
ORDER
The initial plaintiff, Robert E. Lifson, filed this suit on August 29, 2012, alleging that the defendants violated federal securities laws. (Docket # 1). After a brief dispute over appointment of a lead plaintiff, the Court appointed Pension Trust Fund for Operating Engineers (“Pension Trust”) as lead plaintiff. (Docket # 5, # 10, # 15, # 16). The Court held a scheduling conference on Febru...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION Before the court is Petitioner Amor Pau-lina Hirst’s (“Petitioner” or “mother”) Verified Petition for Return [Dkt. No. 1] of the parties’ two minor children to the United Kingdom, brought pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“Hague Convention”), as implemented by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 42 U.S.C. 11601 et ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case is before the court for ruling on the Petition to Vacate Arbitration *638Award (# 1) filed by Plaintiffs, Archer-Daniels-Midland Company and ADM Latin America, Inc.1, and related Motions. This court has carefully reviewed the arguments of the parties and the lengthy exhibits provided by the parties. Following this careful and thorough review, this court rules as follows: (1) P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
The Court has before it Defendant Harmony Brands, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 89), and Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Unauthorized Summary Judgment Reply Materials, and Alternative Motion for Leave to Respond (Dkt. 120). The Court heard oral argument on the motions on March 13, 2013, and now issues the following decision.
BACKGROUND
Both Scentsy...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently pending before the court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed on behalf of the Defendant, ITW Food Equipment Group LLC (“ITW FEG”), against the Plaintiff, Cecilia Spowal, who injured her hand while working with a commercial food mixer manufactured by ITW FEG. On August 4, 2010, Ms. Spowal filed a Complaint alleging strict liability under the Restatement (Second) of Torts (Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1. INTRODUCTION
On December 20, 2010, plaintiffs Karen Outten (“plaintiff Outten”) and James Bradford (collectively “plaintiffs Outten and Bradford”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, instituted an Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) class action against Wilmington Trust Corporation, et al.1 (D.I. 1 at ¶ 1). On January 31, 2011, plainti...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Ghazi Abbar arranged the investment of his family’s wealth with affiliates of Citigroup, Inc. (“Citigroup”), a large multinational financial services provider with numerous business divisions and offices worldwide. The investments performed poorly, and Sheikh Abbar, whom I shall call Mr. Abbar in accordance with American usage, asserts that Citigroup is responsible. It is not th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Wayne County Hospital, Inc. and Ohio Hospital Insurance Company claim that they were compelled to pay a former patient for damages resulting from the primary negligence of Dr. Jakobson in August of 2000. Now, after over a decade of litigation, the hospital and its insurance company continue their attempts to recoup those damages. Toward that end, the Plaintiffs have fil...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON AVG TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND AVG TECHNOLOGIES CZ, S.R.O.’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS
In this proposed class action, plaintiff Christopher Rottner, individually and on behalf of others alleged to be similarly situated, seeks to sue the makers and distributors of AVG PC TuneUp software. Rottner claims that defendants AVG Technologies USA Inc. (AVG US), AVG Technologies CZ, S.R.O. (AV...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Corporate Technologies, Inc. (“CTi”) brings this action against its former employee, Brian Harnett, and his new employer, OnX USA LLC, for breach of contract and tortious interference with advantageous business relationships. Plaintiff alleges that Harnett took confidential information he learned at CTI and has used it to solicit his former CTI clients to transfer...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER is before me on Defendant Carnival Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 14. I have reviewed the arguments, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. For the reasons explained in this Order, Defendant’s Motion is denied.
I. Background
On November 13, 2012, Plaintiff, Sandra Caldwell, filed a one-count Complaint alleging that Defen...
Views: 1
INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Bazoumana Fofana, an alien under a final order of removal from the United States, has filed this pro se petition *330for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking release from detention in the custody of the United States Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (collectively, “DHS”), pending the execution of a final immigrat...
Views: 0
*462
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Southern Bank and Trust’s (“Defendant”) motion to dismiss certain allegations in Count One of Stoney Glen, LLC, John P. Wright, and Allen 0. Keene’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Amended Complaint. Docs. 24, 25; see also Doc. 20 (“Am. Compl.”). Specifically, Defendant argues that Plaintiffs have inadequately pleaded a breach of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER — AMENDED
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs are the former and current employees of Defendant CB Transport, Inc., a trucking company that hauls raw milk from Idaho and Oregon dairy farms to Darigold processing plants, and then takes the finished product to Darigold customers. Plaintiffs claim that under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., they are e...
Views: 0
Page 63919
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In March 2013, this Court granted summary judgment to the defendants on all of plaintiff Habib Sadid’s federal claims. The only remaining claims are Dr. Sadid’s state-law claims for tortious interference with contract, defamation, and intentional interference with emotional distress. Defendants seek summary adjudication of these claims as well.
Before ru...
Views: 0
OPINION
Petitioner, Charles W. Ampadu, MD, has filed a Petition to Amend Certificate of Naturalization (Petition). See d/e 2. Petitioner’s Certificate of Naturalization currently bears the birthdate of July 17, 1949. He seeks an Amended Certificate of Naturalization bearing what he alleges is his true birthdate of July 17, 1956. Respondent, the District Director of the United States Citizenship...
Views: 0
Page 63965
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ OBJECTIONS TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION FOR DISPOSITION ON THE MERITS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................922
A. Factual Background.................................................922
1. The murder and disposal of the body...............................922
2. Disclosure of the locati...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN PETROLEUM TANKERS
PARENT, LLC,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1165 (CKK)
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
MOHAMED AL-ZARNOUQI, et al., )
)
Petitioners, )
v. ) Civil No. 06-1767 (RCL)
)
BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
DARYL L. BULLOCK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0985 ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JANET E. ALLEN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-02228 (JDB)
JANET NAPOLITANO, in her official
capacity as the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security,
Defendant.
ME...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are a number of discovery-related motions, including: (1) Defendant Four Seasons Hotels, Ltd. (Hereinafter, “Defendant” or “Four Seasons”) Motion to Quash, for Entry of a Protective Order and for Sanctions (ECF No. 39); (2) Third Parties 900 Hotel Venture, LLC and 900 HDP, LLC’s (hereinafter, collectively, “900 Venture”) Motion to Quash (ECF No. 46);...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs, Genesis Brand Seed, Ltd., Platinum Genetics, LLC, and William D. Byrum (collectively “Byrum”), brought this action against Defendant, Limagrain Cereal Seeds, LLC, seeking declaratory judgment of Byrum’s rights pursuant to a Settlement Agreement in a prior case between the parties.1 Limagrain has filed a Motion to Dismiss (docket no. 17). On March 7, 2013, the Court heard ora...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand. [ECF No. 11] The motion is fully briefed and ready for disposition. For the following reasons, the motion to remand will be granted. Background
Plaintiffs filed this personal injury/medical malpractice/products liability action in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Missouri, on April 19, 2010. On Septe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs [ECF No. 12] filed by the Plaintiff, Richard Bratton, on September 12, 2012. The Plaintiff attached numerous exhibits to his Motion, including a Bill of Costs [ECF No. 12-17]. The Plaintiff asks the Court to award him $3,062.50 in attorneys’ fees and $425.00 in costs. The Defendants filed a Response [ECF N...
Views: 1
This matter comes before the Court by way of Defendant Accounts Receivables Management, Inc.’s motion [Doe No. 23] seeking the involuntarily dismissal of Plaintiffs complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff did not file opposition to Defendant’s motion,1 and the time for filing opposition has now expired. The Court has considered Defendant’s mo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss filed by Defendants the Tenth Judicial District Drug Task Force (“DTF”) and Officer David Jones (“Officer Jones”) (collectively, “Defendants”) (Court File No. 2). Plaintiff Susan Lamb (“Plaintiff’) filed a response in opposition to this motion (Court File No. 5), to which Defendants replied (Court File No. 8). Defendants argue Plaintiffs 42 U.S...
Views: 0
Page 64154
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STAY PENDING INTER PARTES REVIEW
Defendant Universal Remote Control, Inc. (“Defendant”) moves to stay this litigation pending inter partes review of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,414,426 (the “'426 Patent”), 5,614,906 (the “'906 Patent”), and 6,587,067 (the “'067 Patent”). Plaintiff Universal Electronics, Inc. (“Plaintiff’) opposes the Motion. The Court DENIES the Motion....
Views: 0
STATEMENT
Before the Court is Defendant Office Depot, Inc.’s motion to dismiss. For the reasons that follow, the Court grants the motion.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves a subrogation action which arises from a fire in the 25-story Bank of America, N.A. (“BOA”) banking center located at 33 North Dearborn, in Chicago, Illinois. On March 6, 2011, an electrical counterfeit currency bill det...
Views: 1
OPINION
This cause is before the Court on Defendant Dish Network L.L.C.’s Motion to Maintain Seal on Certain Documents Previously Filed Under Seal in this Action (d/e 273). The Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The parties have reached an agreement regarding 40 of the disputed documents. The Court accepts the parties’ agreements regarding those documents. The remaining six documents w...
Views: 0
Page 64181
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Movants, Guiomar Ferreira Dimas de Melo Pimenta (“Guiomar” or “Decedent’s Widow”) and Josué Dimas de Melo Pimenta’s (“Josué[’s]”) (collectively, “Movants[’]”) Motion to Quash Subpoenas (“Motion”) *1284[ECF No. 9], filed on December 6, 2012; and Movants’ Status Report (“Status Report”) [ECF No. 31], filed on March 21, 2013. The Court has carefully consid...
Views: 0
Page 64193
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff GlobalRock Networks, Inc. (“plaintiff’ or “GlobalRock”) commenced this action against MCI Communication Services, Inc., (“MCI”) doing business as Verizon Business Network Services (“Verizon” or “defendant”), alleging causes of action for breach of contract, fraud and gross negligence in connection with Verizon’s provision of telecommunication s...
Views: 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
CORDOBA INITIATIVE )
CORPORATION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1541 (RWR)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
FRANKLIN J. BURMEISTER, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEREK A. JONES,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1454 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER
AND SEWER AUTHORITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 13, 2013, this Co...
Views: 0
Page 64218
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
JAMES EDWARD RAMSEY, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) Civil ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises from an Air Force project for the construction of an automated coal-fueled power plant in Alaska. After installation of a new conveyor system was delayed, the Air Force assessed liquidated damages against the General Contractor. The parties to the present action are subordinate contractors who dispute among themselves where the ultimate responsibility for tho...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 6)
This civil action is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 6) and the parties’ responsive memoranda. (Docs. 8, 9). Plaintiffs’ claims arise from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”)’s application of the proceeds of the sale of Plaintiff Portsmouth Ambulance, Inc. (“Portsmouth”)’s assets toward the tax liabilities of Urgent Ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON APPEAL FROM THE BANKRUPTCY COURT’S ORDER REGARDING FEES AND EXPENSES
In this bankruptcy appeal, appellant Attorney L. Jed Berliner seeks to reverse a ruling of the Bankruptcy Court disallowing his claim for attorney’s fees and expenses (other than the debtor’s filing fee) in connection with his representation of debtor Wayne Eric Puffer. The court heard oral argument in Sp...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is defendants Star Fuel of Oklahoma, LLC, Lincoln O. Clifton, and David A. Selph’s (“Moving Defendants”) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, filed November 16, 2012. On December 28, 2012, plaintiff filed its response, and on January 4, 2013, Moving Defendants filed their reply.
I. Introduction
This case was tried to a jury from October 9, 2012 through Octobe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter proceeded to a bench trial before the undersigned in Chattanooga, Tennessee on December 11, 2012. Based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, declaratory judgment will be entered in favor of Plaintiff. However, because Plaintiff has not met his burden of proof as to damages, Plaintiffs recovery will be limited to reasonable attorney’s fees and ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Greg White’s Report and Recommendation granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs Application for Attorney Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice ActJECF #26). Defendant has filed a Response to Report and Recommendation stating they will not be filing an objection.
Therefore, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
By Judgment Order entered on March 29, 2013, the court GRANTED the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers Local Union No. 175 (“Local Union No. 175” or “Local 175”), GRANTED the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL-CIO (“IBT” or “International Union”), and GRANTED the mot...
Views: 0
ORDER
Now before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), filed on February 14, 2013. (Doc. 7.) Plaintiff filed a Response on March 7, 2013. (Doc. 8.) Defendant filed a Reply on March 21, 2013. (Doc. 11.) After reviewing the parties’ briefing, the evidence, and the applicable law, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.
I. Backgrou...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On November 7, 2012, Plaintiff Abakan, Inc. (“Abakan”) filed the complaint (the “Complaint” or “Compl.”) in this action against Defendant Uptick Capital, LLC (“Uptick”), alleging breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment under New York State law. Abakan also alleged that it was entitled to reimbursement by Uptick of any legal fees incurred in conn...
Views: 0
ORDER BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Plaintiff Lawrence C. Mathis’s Motion to Remand [# 8], Defendants’ Response [# 9], and Mathis’s Reply [# 12], Having reviewed the documents, the governing law, and the file as a whole, the Court now enters the following opinion and orders. Background Plaintiff Lawrence Mathis filed this law...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff has sued the Village of Forest Park and one of its police officers, Young Lee, for their alleged violations of her constitutional rights, Title VII and the lili*873nois Gender Violence Act and for assault and battery. The Village has filed a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 56 motion for summary judgment on the claims plaintiff asserts against it.1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Third-Party Plaintiff Debbie Crim’s motion for leave to amend her operative third-party complaint [232] and motions in limine to exclude expert testimony by Gene Neri [226] and Peter Vrdolyak [231], Third-Party Defendant Vrdolyak Law Group’s (“VLG”) motions in limine numbers 1-12 [228] and motion for instructions [265], and the parties’ supplement...
Views: 0
Page 64499
OPINION & ORDER
At its core, this is a breach of contract case. The contract at issue defines the parties’ rights and obligations; plaintiffs assert that defendants failed to fulfill their obligations and that they were damaged *430thereby. Rule 8 governs the pleading standard plaintiffs must meet.
Determining whether plaintiffs in a breach of contract case have pled a claim should not present ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
This is a habeas case filed by a state prisoner, Marquis Rashawn Douglas, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Mr. Douglas was convicted by a jury in Napa County Superior Court of second degree murder (Cal. Pen.Code § 187), see CT 544 (count one); shooting into an inhabited house (Cal. Pen.Code § 246), see CT 549 (count three); discharge of a firearm in ...
Views: 1
Page 64538
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON CONVERSION CLAIM, AND DENYING CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a theft of trade secrets case in which plaintiff Language Line Services, Inc. (“Language Line”) alleges that its former employees, individual defendants Patrick Curtin and William Schwartz, took confidential Language Line information to their n...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on a Motion to Lift Stay for Limited Purpose of Granting Leave to File Amended Answer and Entering Judgment Based on Collateral Estoppel filed by Defendant Lanier Parking Systems of Virginia, Inc. (“Lanier”) (ECF No. 85). The remaining Defendants have either adopted Lanier’s Motion (ECF Nos. 87, 90, 91) or separately filed motions raising ident...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants McVey & Co. Investments, LLC (“McVey LLC”) and Marty L. McVey (“McVey”) (collectively, “Defendants”) move pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3) to dismiss all claims against them1 due to lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue.2 (R. 15, Mot. at 1.) Alternatively, they move to dismiss on the basis of forum non...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON
TOXICS et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1299 (JDB)
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY et al.,
Defendants,
and
AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE,
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Dennis Miller seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying his application for supplemental security income (“SSI”) pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3). Miller contends the administrative record (“AR”) does not contain substantial evidence to support the Commissioner’...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS BY DEFENDANTS CARLOS POWELL (D-l), ERIC POWELL (D-2), EARNEST PROGE (D-5), TOBIAS PROGE (D-6), TAMIKA TURNER (D-8), MARGARITA DE VALLEJO (D-10), BENNY WHIG-HAM (D-ll), AND DONALD WILSON (D-12) (docket no. 7h)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...............................................................764
LEGAL STANDARD...............................................
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
Criminal No. 11-129-1 (CKK)
GEZO GOEONG EDWARDS,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(May 7, 2013)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
TONIA EDWARDS, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOHN VANDERKAM and
GAYLYN DIERINGER,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 09-cv-1907 (RLW)
v.
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION and
MELISSA VANDERKAM,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff Craig J. Chillemi (“Chillemi” or the “Plaintiff’) brought the instant action against the Defendants for violations of his constitutional rights to freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom from compelled self-incrimination, and the right to equal protection, all stemming from an alleged false arrest on July 8, 2009, and his alleged sub...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Jorge Paret-Ruiz (“Plaintiff’ or “ParetíRuiz”) brings this action against the United States (“Defendant” or “government”), seeking damages pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) for malicious prosecution, false arrest, and false imprisonment. (See Docket No. 1.) Presently before the court is the government’s motion to dismiss. (Docket No. 32.) For the following reaso...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint brought by Defendants Prestige Capital Markets, Ltd. (“Prestige BVI”), Prestige Capital Traders, LLP (“Prestige UK”), Christopher Wilson, and Wilson, Haglund & Paulsen, PC (“WHP”) (collectively, Defendants). [Doc. No. 25.] For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants it in part ...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendant Tohono O’odham Nation (the “Nation”) plans to construct and operate a major casino on unincorporated land within the outer boundaries of the City of *753Glendale, Arizona, which is in the greater Phoenix metropolitan area. The State of Arizona, the Gila River Indian Community, and the Salt River Pima-Marieopa Indian Community (collectively “Plaintiffs”) argue that the proposed casi...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) Defendant Kehinde Oguntoyinbo’s *1207Motion to Suppress, filed January 23, 2013 (Doc. 95) (“Motion to Suppress”); and (ii) Agreed Order to Join in Defendant Oguntoyindo’s [sic] Motion to Suppress, filed March 4, 2013 (Doc. 109).1 The Court held an evidentiary hearing on February 26, 2013. The primary issues are: (i) whether...
Views: 1
Page 65062
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Julio Tardío, has moved pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for relief from this Court’s Order of October 25, 2012, that appointed Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme (“MPS”) as lead plaintiff and Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A. (“G & E”) as lead counsel in this consolidated securities class action against New Oriental Education & Technology Group, I...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On August 23, 2012, the Plaintiff Charles Thomas (“the Plaintiff’), on behalf of him*85self and all others similarly situated, commenced this action against the Defendant American Service Finance Corporation d/b/a Merchants Interstate Collection Agency (“the Defendant”) for alleged acts committed by the Defendant in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Bank of America, N.A., (“Bank of America”) filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) against defendants Wilmington Trust FSB (“Wilmington Trust”), Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Co. (“Commonwealth”), Fidelity-National Title Insurance Co. (“Fidelity”), and First American Title Insurance Co. (“First American,” with Commonwealth and First American, the “Title Insurers,” a...
Views: 1
ORDER RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Corrections Corporation of American (“Defendant” or “CCA”) has filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication in the alternative. For reasons discussed below, summary judgment shall be denied. Summary adjudication shall be granted in part and denied in part. Summary adjudication of the prayer for ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff Bryan C. Mclntire alleges that defendant Sunrise Specialty Co. infringed his toilet bowl design patent.1 Plaintiff now moves for summary judgment on the ground that no reasonable juror could fail to find that defendant’s bowl infringes his design. Defendant cross-moves for summary judgment on the ground that no reasonable juror could find that its bowl infringes plaintiffs paten...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
Victor Coureau (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action pro se against Bill Granfield (“Defendant”), President of Local 100 UNITE HERE (the “Union”), alleging various wrongs and injustices related to, inter alia, personal injuries, termination of benefits, fraudulent inducement, and discrimination on the basis of race. The Court construes Plaintiffs allegations to arise from the U...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Champion Auto Sales, LLC (“Champion”) and Robert A. Lee, Jr. (together, “Plaintiffs”) commenced this breach of contract action against Polaris Sales Inc. (“Polaris”) on April 5, 2012. Pending before the Court is Polaris’s motion to. compel arbitration and/or stay the action pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. For the following reas...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Presently before the court is petitioner Sye C. Newton’s (“petitioner”) application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 1) Petitioner is a Delaware inmate in custody at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Wilmington, Delaware. For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application;
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGR...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TIMOTHY SKRYNNIKOV,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-0609 (GK)
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
ASSOCIATION,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Timothy ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KWAKU ATTAKORA,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1413 (CKK)
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(May 8...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO VACATE JUDGMENTS Defendants Ronald Merritt and Larry Wilkins move to set aside their convictions *251and vacate their guilty pleas pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(d) and 28 U.S.C. § 2255.1 For the reasons stated below, the respective motions will be denied. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND A. Defendants’ Arrests The facts underlying defendants’ guilty pleas are lar...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This matter is currently before the Court upon the motion [DE # 11] of the plaintiff, Boyd Van Winkle, Jr., for de novo review of the denial of his application for long-term disability benefits under an ERISA-governed benefit plan offered by his employer, Kentucky Utilities, and issued and administered by the defendant, Life Insurance Company of North America, d/b/a/ Cigna Group I...
Views: 0
Page 65540
OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the motion in limine of the Plaintiffs, Allen King and Bruce King, as Administrators of the Estate of Roger King (“Plaintiffs”), to exclude the testimony of Lt. Bobby Day of the Kentucky State Police (“KSP”) pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), Kumho Tire Co. Ltd. v. C...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case arises out of an insurer’s refusal to pay benefits under an executive protection policy. Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 30). For the reasons given herein, the Court denies the motion.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff Orgill/Singer & Associates, Inc. (“Orgill”) used non-party Lakes Payroll, Inc. (“Lakes”) to process its payroll from 20...
Views: 0
SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Motions for Summary Judgment [ECF Nos. 119, 120], filed by Defendants Gulf Coast Collection Bureau, Inc. (“Gulf Coast”), Florida United Radiology, L.C. (“Florida United”) and Sheridan Acquisition Associations, P.A. (“Sheridan”), and the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF No. 156], filed by Plaintiff Mark Mais. For the reasons...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter, which came before the Court for a bail determination on April 26, 2013, presents novel factual issues as well as the kind of legal challenges that often arise, when applying traditional legal concepts to cases emanating from digital tech*210nology. As described in further detail herein, the undersigned directed that the defendant be removed in custody to face ch...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR 'I`HE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEVINCCI SALAH HOURANI, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civ. No. 10-1618 (TFH)
)
)
ALEXANDER V. MIRTCHEV, et al., ) F I L E D
)
Defendants. ) MAY 0 8 2013
Clerk, U.S. District and
Bankruptcy Courts
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case involves alleged violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C...
Views: 0
Page 65682
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules for Magistrates. On March 6, 2013, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 41) recommending that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (D...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER “The quality of mercy is not strain’d, ... it blesseth him that gives and him that takes.” William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, act IV, sc. 1 (1596). Not satisfied with the quality of the court’s mercy in modifying his sentence under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, petitioner, a convicted drug trafficker, now seeks federal habeas corpus relief to which he is ultimately n...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Christian Miranda-Lopez (“Plaintiff’) brought this claim against several defendants, including Jose Figueroa-Sancha, the former Superintendent of the Puerto Rico Police Department (“Defendants”). For the following reasons, the court DISMISSES this case with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). I. Timeline of Events Plaintiff filed his complaint on June 2...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
U.S. Bank, N.A. (“U.S. Bank”) and First American Title Insurance Company (“First American”) have filed cross-motions for summary judgment. U.S. Bank brought this suit against First American for breach of contract and bad faith under a title insurance policy with respect to a securitized mortgage, of which U.S. Bank is the trustee. First American argues that the claims are barred by res...
Views: 0
THE CASE OF THE ITSY BITSY TEENY WEENY BIKINI TOP V. THE (MORE) ITSY BITSY TEENY WEENY PASTIE
1
ORDER CONCERNING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
An ordinance dealing with semi-nude dancers has once again fallen on the Court’s lap. The City of San Antonio (“City”) wants exotic dancers employed by Plaintiffs to wear larger pieces of fabric to cover more of the female breast. Thus, the age old question...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER In this case brought under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq., Plaintiffs M.L. and B.L., individually and on behalf of K.L. (“Plaintiffs”), seek permission to conduct two brief “additional evidence” depositions of Defendant’s teacher and paraprofessional for the September-June portion of the 2011-12 school year in order...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs Automobile Club of New York, Inc., doing business as “AAA New York,” and AAA North Jersey, Inc. (collectively, “AAA”) claim that the privilege log submit*57ted by defendant the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (the “Port Authority”) is deficient. The Port Authority produced a privilege log that identified categories of withheld documents, ra...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ motions for partial summary judgment under Fed. R.Civ.P. 56(a) and class certification pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a) and b(3). Plaintiffs previously interned at various magazines owned by Defendant Hearst Corporation (“Defendant”) without pay. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant violated the minimum wage requirements, overtime provisions, and recor...
Views: 0
Page 65882
OPINION & ORDER
This case is about whether a corporation made, or missed, the deadline to exercise its right to redeem its outstanding notes early, on highly favorable terms. On March 15, 2013, plaintiff Chesapeake Energy Corporation (“Chesapeake”) issued a notice to redeem approximately $1.3 billion in notes due in 2019 that it had issued in 2012. Chesapeake’s notice stated that it was redeemi...
Views: 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ESTATE OF JOHN DOE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 08-540 (JDB)
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Shortly after 1 p.m....
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
On January 3, 2013, 2013 WL 1911301, the Honorable Steven M. Gold, Chief Magistrate Judge, filed a comprehensive Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) regarding the amount of damages to be awarded to plaintiff State Farm Automobile Insurance Company from various defaulting defendants. Most of the defaulting defendants neither participated in the proceedings before Judge Gold,...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ELIZABETH GUEVARA, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 10-1941 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This Court’s September 25, 2012 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (“Findings and Conclusions,” Dkt. 116) culminated in the dismissal of this action for *883lack of personal jurisdiction. What still remains is the motion of Philos & D, DonHee Park and Jaehee Park (collectively “Philos & D”) for sanctions against plaintiff Philos Technologies, Inc. (“Philos Tech...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
(Doe. 204)
1. Introduction
Plaintiffs Christine Bauer-Ramazani and Carolyn Duffy (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) move for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. (Doc. 204.) Defendants Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America-College Retirement and Equities Fund, College Retirement and Equities Fund, TIAA-CREF Individual & Institutional Servi...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [27], Defendant’s Motion for Hearing Regarding Motion for Summary Judgment [28], Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [29], and Plaintiffs Motion for Hearing Regarding Motion for Summary Judgment [33]. After reviewing the record, the Court enters the following Order.
Background
In a prior declaratory judgment actio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action is presently before the court upon the following motions: (1) third-party defendant Materials Management, Inc.’s motion to dismiss BSC Steel, Inc.’s third-party complaint; and (2) plaintiff/counterclaim defendant W & W Steel, LLC and third-party defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss BSC Steel, LLC’s second amended counterclaim Counts I, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NICHOLAS SPAETH,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1376 (ESH)
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Nicholas Spaeth b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
1. Introduction
Before this Court are cross motions for summary judgment: 1) Defendant Alabama Power Company’s (“Alabama Power’s”) Motion for Summary Judgment as to all of Plaintiffs’ claims, filed on December 12, 2012 (Doc. 81), and 2) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Count One of their Second Amended Complaint (Action for Declaratory Judgment of Ripari...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This diversity action for injunctive and/or mandamus relief and declaratory judgment arises out of the bid that Horsley Company, LLC (“Horsley”) made to construct an outbound baggage system for General Mitchell International Airport, located within Milwaukee County Wisconsin. Five Star Airport Alliance, Inc. (“Five Star”), Horsley’s successor-in-interest by merger, is the curre...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Emile Greywoode (“Plaintiff’ or “Greywoode”) brings this lawsuit, alleging claims of race and national origin discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Specifically, Greywoode alleges that his former employer, Defendant Science Applications Interna...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Joely Zettlemoyer, on behalf of her minor daughter, P.M.R., appeals from a denial of supplemental security income benefits (“SSI”) by the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”). The action is one brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to review the final determination of the Commissioner. On September 25, 2009, plaintiff protectively filed an applicatio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE 41(a)(2) This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff Chicle Investments, LLC’s motion for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule 41(a)(2). (Doc. 19). The defendant United States of America has filed a conditional opposition, and the plaintiff has replied. (Docs....
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Raquel Torres filed this putative class action on behalf of herself and others similarly situated against Defendant Nutrisystem, Inc. (“Nutrisystem”) in Orange County Superior Court on September 18, 2012. The case was removed to this Court on October 24, 2012, (Dkt. No. 1), and Ms. Torres filed her First Amended Com...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT STARWOOD VACATION OWNERSHIP, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED JANUARY 25, 2013 WITH PREJUDICE (ECF No. 69)
Plaintiff Kenneth W. Cambrón has brought suit against his former employer. He claims wrongful termination in violation of public policy, breach of Hawaii’s whistleblower statute, and fraud.
Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS In this action for breach of contract and related claims, Defendant Contra Costa County (“the County”) moves under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(1) to dismiss the second amended complaint (“SAC”) for failure to state a claim and for lack of standing, respectively. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. I. BACKGROUND A. RSG’s Cla...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) brought a fraudulent transfer claim against Ricardo Acosta-Martinez (“Acosta” or “Trustee”) and Cornelius Tamboer (“Tamboer”), a former Westernbank director. (Docket No. 182.) Acosta, but not Tamboer, moved to dismiss. (Docket No. 442.) For the following reasons, the court DENIES the motion to dismiss at Docket No. 442.
*315I....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in this case are seeking equitable reformation and declaratory judgment with respect to the annual payment required to exercise annual options in the natural gas storage leases under which Plaintiffs are lessors and Defendant Southern Star is lessee. This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 110). The motion is fully briefed...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 7]. For the following reasons, the Court DENIES the motion.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff John Según Edobor is a citizen of Canada and Liberia and a lawful permanent resident of the United States. (Compl. ¶ 19.) On June 16, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Form N-400 Application for Naturalization with the United States Citizenship a...
Views: 1
Page 66686
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
WILLIAM E. SHEA )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 1
Page 66694
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
On February 21, 2013, Petitioner Cornele Overstreet, on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board, filed a Petition for a Temporary Injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act against Respondent SFTC, LLC, d/b/a Santa Fe Tortilla Company. (Doc. 2). SFTC moved to dismiss the Petition, contending that neither the Board nor the NLRB’s General...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion for summary judgment (Doc. 40) filed by the defendants, the Alabama Administrative Office of Courts (the “AOC”), the Juvenile Court of Mobile County, Alabama (the “Juvenile Court”), Judge Edmond Ñaman (“Judge Ñaman”), and Lawrence Battiste (“Battiste”) (collectively, the “defendants”). The court has reviewed the parties’ briefs in support and ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ROSA ALBA FLORES-HERNANDEZ,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-cv-897 (RLW)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Page 66724
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BEAUMONT INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action 13-401 (BMK-ESH-RC)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 1
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Donald Fell has moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence of death, to vacate and set aside his judgment of conviction and to grant him a new trial. The Government has opposed the motion, and requested summary dismissal of Fell’s claims. Fell has separately moved for leave to conduct discovery pursuant to the Federal Rules of ■Civil and...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is brought under the Employee Retirement Income . Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Plaintiff Sandra Reid (“Reid”) contends that Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) wrongfully terminated her long term disability benefits after 24 months despite substantial medical documentation demonstrating that Plaintiff was disabled due to dementia...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MELVIN LEE DAVIS, §
Plaintiff, §
v. § Civil Action No. 12-0676 (RLW)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, §
Defendant. §
)
MEMoRANDUM oPINIoN‘
This matter is before the Court on the defendant's motion to dismiss, For the reasons
discussed below, the motion will be granted.
I. BACKGROUND
lt appears that the plaintiff assisted the government by p...
Views: 0
Page 66791
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Gillian K. Suess filed this action seeking review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her application for *922Disability Insurance Benefits under the Social Security Act (“SSA”). 42 U.S.C. §§ 416, 423(d), 1381a. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant t...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case is a § 1988 action by a prisoner who was seriously injured when the correctional officer driving his prison transport vehicle was required to brake suddenly, causing the prisoner to hurtle forward and hit his head on a metal divider. The case is before the court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (# 63), Plaintiffs’ Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss (# 69), and Plaintiffs’ O...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a breach of contract action. It is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Dismissing Counts 2-9 of Defendants’ Counterclaim [Doc. 354] and the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 358]. For the reasons set forth below, the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. 354] is GRANTED and the Defendants’ Motion for Summa...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Dwight Pulley filed suit against defendant UnitedHealth Group, Inc. (“UnitedHealth”), alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and defamation. In his complaint, Mr. Pulley also cites the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (“GINA”). Currently pending before the Court is United-Health’s moti...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff appeals from a denial of supplemental security income benefits by the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”). The action is one brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to review the final determination of the Commissioner. On July 27, 2009, plaintiff, then forty years old, filed an application for Supplemental Security Income benefits under Title II of t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court upon Plaintiff First Bancorp, Inc. d/b/a First National Bank Russell Springs (First National) and Defendant United States’ competing Motions for Summary Judgment. (Docket Nos. 11 & 12, respectively.) The United States filed a Response, (Docket No. 15), First National filed a Combined Reply and Response, (Docket No. 18), and the United States file...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF’S MIXED MOTIVE CLAIM
Before the Court are the parties’ supplemental briefs on Plaintiff Charles Reed’s claim for race discrimination under a mixed motive theory. On February 27, 2013, 927 F.Supp.2d 508 (W.D.Tenn.2013), the Court granted Defendant Proctor and Gamble Manufacturing Company summary judgment (D.E. # 73) on all of Plaintiffs claims...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
The Court has pending before it Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (Rec. Doc. 47). The Court has reviewed the briefs and the applicable law and now issues this Order and Reasons.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Facts
Plaintiff Neal Goulas brings this action for unpaid overtime and wrongful termination against his former employer, Defendant LaGreca Services, Inc. (“Services”), doing bus...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Before me are the motions of Defendants Accubuilt, Inc., and United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 975, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. (See Doc. No. 28 and 30). Plaintiff Darren Dailey filed a memorandum in opposition. (Doc. No. 33). Accubuilt and Local 975 each filed briefs in reply. (Doc. No. 42 and...
Views: 0
Page 67004
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Lexington Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 28], The Court previously denied the motion as moot. Order Dismissing Case Without Prejudice [ECF No. 91]. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit remanded the case to this Court to rule on the merits of the motion. See Mandate 9 [ECF No...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
INTRODUCTION
I assume familiarity with the underlying facts and circumstances of this case that are detailed in my memorandum of April 5, 2013. Tummino v. Hamburg, 936 F.Supp.2d 162, 2013 WL 1348656 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 5, 2013). Nevertheless, some introductory words' are appropriate. This case involved Plan B and Plan B One-Step, emergency contraceptives that can be taken to reduc...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND ATTORNEY’S FEES
On April 10, 2013, Defendant In-N-Out Burgers (“In-N-Out”) filed a motion for sanctions and attorney’s fees. (Doc. No. 70.) On April 29, 2013, Plaintiff A.J. Oliver filed a response in opposition to In-N-Out’s motion. (Doc. No. 78.) On May 6, 2013, In-N-Ouf filed its reply. (Doc. No. 81.) On May 8, 2013, Plaintiff filed objections...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Pending before the Court are the motions in limine of defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“Novartis”). Having reviewed the parties’ written submissions and provided them with the opportunity for oral argument, the Court grants the motions in part, denies them in part, and reserves them in part.
On June 29, 2006, plaintiff Chris Hill filed her complaint in San Joaqui...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff QBE Insurance (International) Ltd. (QBE) purports to advance claims for breach of contract and negligence. arising from alleged damage to cargo being transported via air from San Francisco, California to Shanghai, China. The parties agree that the Montreal Convention, a treaty governing the international air carriage of cargo, constitutes...
Views: 0
Page 67173
ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
On April 23, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah Lynch issued Findings and Recommendation. He concluded that Tyrone Payne’s petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 should be conditionally granted as to one claim and that two other claims should be dismissed with prejudice. Neither party filed objections.
Reviewing for ...
Views: 0
Page 67187
*809ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS IN PART AND DENYING IT IN PART
Defendant’s motion to dismiss the first amended complaint came on for hearing before this court on May 1, 2013. Plaintiffs appeared by their counsel Stephen Gardner, and defendant appeared by its counsel Charles C. Sipos and David T. Biderman. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the releva...
Views: 1
ORDER Re: Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of ' Invalidity [230]
Currently before the Court is Defendants Dynaflex International and GForce Corporation’s (“Defendants”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Invalidity [230]. The Court having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to this Motion and having considered all arguments presented to the Court, NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FO...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In this criminal prosecution, defendant pled guilty, without a written plea agreement, to a one-count indictment charging him with unlawfully re-entering the United States following a prior removal, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The subsequent sentencing proceeding presented the question whether defendant’s two prior Virginia state convictions for unlawful bodily injury ...
Views: 1
ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Defendant, Neighbors Moving Services, Ine.’s Motion for Protective Order and to Stay Discovery (DE 17) which was referred to United States Magistrate Judge, Lurana S. Snow. This is an action for unpaid overtime wages filed pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. The Plaintiff alleges that between December 1, 2011 and Ju...
Views: 0
Page 67255
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Robert Fee (“plaintiff’) brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to review the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) that he is not disabled under the Social Security Act, and therefore, is not entitled to a period of Social Security disability and disability insurance benefits. Plaintiff originally applied f...
Views: 0
Page 67336
DECISION AND ORDER
In the present case, two organizations representing residents of Milwaukee’s in*660ner city challenge a decision of the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”) and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (“WisDOT”) to make improvements to the “Zoo Interchange,” which is a part of the Interstate Highway System located in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Area. The plaintiffs conte...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Jessica Lee Wallace (“Ms. Wallace”) initiated this job discrimination case arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against Defendant Eric H. Holder, Jr., in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the United States Department of Justice (the “Attorney General”), on July 29, 2011. (Doc. 1). The lawsuit stems from Ms....
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
PATTI HAMMOND SHAW, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
*1040Order Re Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint and Motion to Stay Case
7. Background
The plaintiffs in this litigation (collectively, “AIG” or “Plaintiffs”) purchased hundreds of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) worth tens of billions of dollars between 2005 and 2007. The listed defendants acted as sponsors, sellers and underwriters for 346 of the securities, and as originat...
Views: 0
*1259
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has for its consideration Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Original Complaint and Opening Brief in Support (Doc. 7), which is now at issue (see Docs. 15 and 20).
I. Background Facts
In this case, plaintiffs, Jennifer Sutherlin and T.J. Sutherlin (“plaintiffs” or the “Sutherlins”), allege claims, individually and on behalf of their minor child (des...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Judge Mark A. Bruno brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille, Justice Thomas G. Saylor, Justice J. Michael Ea-kin, Justice Deborah McCloskey Todd, Justice Seamus P. McCaffery, and Justice Max Baer (collectively, “PA Supreme Court Defendants”). On February 1, 2013, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Joe Felix, Jay Huskey, Michael Mahler, Ben Woodward, and the City of Sutherlin (“City”) move for summary judgment on plaintiff Erica Price’s claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. R. 56. For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
On October 27, 2009, at approximately 3:45pm and after consuming an unknown quantity of ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On September 6, 2012, plaintiff JAR Laboratories sued its insurer, Great Amer*939ican E & S Insurance Company, seeking a declaration that defendant has a duty to defend it in a lawsuit (the “underlying suit”) filed by Teikoku Pharma USA (“TPU”). In addition to declaratory relief, plaintiff seeks damages for breach of contract and for vexatious and unreasonable denia...
Views: 0
Order
Pending before the court is a motion to remand filed by plaintiff Jónnie Ryan, as personal representative of Mark Ryan and the Estate of Mark Ryan (“Plaintiffs”). Dkts. 3, 4. Having, considered the motion, response, petition, and applicable law, the court is of the opinion that the motion should be DENIED.
I. Background
Decedent Mark Ryan worked for defendant Wild Well Control, Inc. (“Wild ...
Views: 1
Page 67556
ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT1 AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RELIEF ON BRADY2 CLAIMS
I. SUPREME COURT REMAND AND MANDATE 933
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 933
III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 933
IV. CONE’S PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS — THE BRADY CLAIM 935
V. THE WITHHELD INFORMATION 935
VI.THE TRIAL FOR THE MURDERS OF CLEOPATRA AND SHIPLEY TODD — FRIDAY, APRIL 16, 19...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ post-trial motions. The following motions are currently pending and will be addressed in this Opinion: (1) Defendant’s Motion for Directed Verdict and Judgment as a Matter of Law (ECF # 120, 121) (Response at ECF # 140; Reply at ECF # 144); (2) Plaintiffs Motion for Award of Prejudgment Interest (ECF # 117) (Response a...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant F. Harvey Whittemore’s Motion in Limine Regarding (1) the Admissibility of Evidence of Whittemore’s Reasonable Interpretation of 2 U.S.C. § 441f; and (2) the Admissibility of Testimony of 'Whittemore’s Expert Witness (# 791). The government has responded (# 111), and "Whittemore has replied (# 130).
I. Facts and Background
In 2007, defendant Whittemore allege...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS [DKT. NOS. 7, 8, 10, 11] AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company (“Allstate”) brought this declaratory judgment action, seeking a determination of the parties’ rights and responsibilities under an insurance policy issued to Nathan Cogar (“Cogar”). Pending before the Court are four...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The government dismissed all charges against defendant in this case shortly after his demise in January, 2013. The instant dispute concerns discovery materials produced while the criminal case against defendant was ongoing and which are subject to a protective order. Defendant’s estate now moves to modify the protective order to permit the disclosure to Congress and the public ...
Views: 0
Page 67706
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT BE DISMISSED (Dkt. No. 15)
Plaintiffs, proceeding under pseudonyms, have brought this lawsuit against various social workers with the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (“DCF”), employees of the state juvenile court in Pittsfield, the Berkshire County District Attorney’s office, and a court-appointed atto...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs claim that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Federal Land and Policy Management Act (FLPMA) by approving the Sampson Grove Forest Management Project, a timber sale that would allow commercial logging on 500 acres of BLM land near Ashland, Oregon.
The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Magistrate J...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment [46] of the Defendants Vicksburg Healthcare, LLC d/b/a River Region Medical Center (“RRMC”) and Darlene White. Having considered the parties’ submissions, the record, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion should be granted.
J. BACKGROUND
On August 26, 2010, Plaintiff Maggie Fife, a ...
Views: 0
ORDER
During oral argument on April 24, 2013, on defendant Arab Bank’s motion for summary judgment, decision was reserved with respect to whether plaintiffs’ civil conspiracy claims would be dismissed in light of Rothstein v. UBS AG, 708 F.3d 82, 97-98 (2d Cir.2013). In Rothstein, the Second Circuit held that the Anti-Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2331 et seq. (“ATA”), does not permit civil claim...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Larry B. Williams seeks suppression of evidence obtained by the police from his vehicle after a traffic stop that followed Defendant’s vehicle weaving in his lane to the extent that he touched and rode on the right fog line several times and briefly crossed the center line. Defendant challenges the validity of the stop, arguing that the police officer had no basis to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this suit, a multiemployer pension plan seeks withdrawal liability payments from the owner of a withdrawing employer pursuant to the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 19801 (“MPPAA”), on the ground that the owner had owned and leased a building to the withdrawing employer. The owner opposes this effort on the ground that his ownership and leasing of the building...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Two years ago, Kelly J. Sheppard and several others brought a putative class action asserting claims against The Manhattan Club Timeshare Association, Inc. and others arising out of their purchase and ownership of flexible timeshare interests in The Manhattan Club. See Sheppard v. Manhattan Club Timeshare Ass’n, Inc., No. 11 Civ. 4362(PKC) (S.D.N.Y. filed June 28, 2011). In...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On April 10, 2012, the Plaintiff Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action by filing a Complaint in interpleader. In the Complaint, the Plaintiff alleges that it is a mere stakeholder that could be exposed to double liability arising from the Defendant William L. Mitchell, Jr.’s (“Mitchell”) and the Defendant Charmaine E. Cooper’s...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
*282Plaintiffs1 bring this putative class action on behalf of -themselves and others similarly situated (the “Class”) against Barclays PLC, Barclays Bank PLC (“Bar-clays Bank”), and Barclays Capital Inc., (“BCI”) (collectively, “Barclays”), and John Varley, Robert Diamond, Christopher Lucas, and Marcus Agius (“Individual Defendants” and, together with Barclays,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION Introduction In this action, Plaintiff MOYLE PETROLEUM COMPANY (“Moyle”) seeks declaratory and injunctive relief as against Defendants RAY LAHOOD (Department of Transportation), VICTOR MENDEZ (Federal Highway Administration), JAMES CHRISTIAN (Federal Highway Administration, Utah Division), and JOHN NJORD (Utah Department of Transportation) (collectively, “Defendants”) in conn...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 14)
Former Denver mayoral political appointee Wayne McDonald filed suit after being accused of sexually harassing a Denver police officer and fired as a result. The appointee claims the allegations were false and that his termination, which occurred before any opportunity for a hearing to clear his name, constituted a breach of his employment contract ...
Views: 0
*579
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the court are three motions to dismiss, filed by defendants Clifford Jobe, Jr. (Doc. 5), Christian Fow (Doc. 30), and the remaining defendants, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State Police, Nathan Swink, Ralph Hockenberry, and David Rush (Doc. 12). For the reasons that follow, the court will deny the motions (Docs. 12, 30) to dismiss Count I of the co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiff, Steven Creelman, initiated this lawsuit after the defendant, Carpenters Pension and Annuity Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity (“Carpenters Fund” or “Fund”), denied him a disability pension. Creelman alleges that, in rendering its decision, the Carpenters Fund violated several aspects of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), and he brings suit u...
Views: 0
Page 68034
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff, Sonja Perry, seeks review of the final decision of the Commissioner (“Commissioner”) of the Social Security Administration (“Agency”) denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title II of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(2), and 1382c(a)(3)(A). Ms. Perry asks the...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS (ECF NOS. 15, 51)
Before the Court are Defendant Argent Mortgage Company, LLC’s (“Argent”) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 45) and Defendant Deutsche Bank National Trust Company on Behalf of GS Mortgage Securities Corp. GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-10 Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-10, Trent Thompson and Walter Thompson’s (colle...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 1246), Plaintiffs’ Opposed Motion for an Extension of Time to File Their Disclosure Identifying a General Causation Witness and Expert Reports (Dkt. 1274), and Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Extension of Time to File Their Disclosure Identifying a General Causation Witness and Expert ...
Views: 0
ORDER AUTHORIZING DISCLOSURE OF CLIENT CONFIDENCES AND COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND PETITIONER REGARDING BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS
Pursuant to South Carolina Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6(b)(5) and/or (b)(6),1 the United States has moved for an order authorizing attorney Paul L. Held to disclose to the government matters which may arguably fall within the scope of the attorney-client pri...
Views: 1
*666
ORDER DENYING CLASS CERTIFICATION AND GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANTS
The plaintiffs assert that the defendants defrauded them into buying a brand of child car seat that failed compliance tests and did not comply with federal safety standards. The plaintiffs seek to represent a class of Florida residents who bought the same product. The plaintiffs assert only economic injury; ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Aaron M. Willoughby filed an action against Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (the “Commissioner”), seeking review of the denial of his application for disability benefits. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. On July 12, 2012, I denied the Commissioner’s motion and granted Mr. Willoughby’s motion, remand...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Kimberly Morrow (“Morrow” or “Plaintiff’) filed this action against her former employer, L & L Products, Inc. (“L & L” or “Defendant”), asserting claims regarding alleged unequal wages under the Equal Pay Act and Title VII, and asserting gender discrimination and retaliation claims under Title...
Views: 1
Page 68211
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND TO APPOINT CLASS COUNSEL [28] This is a civil rights lawsuit brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs Adhid Miri and The Exchange, Inc., on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated legal persons, allege that Defendants violated their Fourth Amendment rights by following the Michigan Department of...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [15] Before the Court is Defendant Kelly Services, Inc.’s motion for partial summary judgment on Plaintiff John Isotalo’s federal and state age discrimination claims.1 (Dkt. 15.) Defendant moves for summary judgment on Plaintiffs claim arguing that Plaintiffs representations to the Social Security Administration that he w...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a putative class-action lawsuit against the Federal National Mortgage Assoeiation and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, federally chartered private corporations known more commonly by their nicknames Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.1 The Plaintiffs are local governments that wish to represent a class of all 159 Georgia counties. They contend the Defendants’ nonpayment of Geor...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
:
WILLIAM PORTER :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. :
:
KATHLEEN G. SEBELIUS, : Civil Act...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 16], filed on February 25, 2013. For the reasons state in this Opinion and Order, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part. In addition, the Court’s Opinion and Order disposes of three additional motions: Motion for Order to Authorize Notice to Similarly-Situated Persons Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
This ease is before the court for resolution of a discovery dispute. The underlying action arises out of an employment relationship. Plaintiff John Dauska, a former employee of Defendant Green Bay Packaging Inc. (GBP), filed the action alleging that GBP discriminated against him and event...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending are defendant Marcus Wyn Taylor’s motion to suppress evidence, filed December 18, 2012, supplemental motion to suppress evidence, filed December 27, 2012, and second supplemental motion to suppress evidence, filed January 14, 2013. On January 22 to January 24, 2013, the court held an evidentiary hearing attended by counsel for the parties and Mr. Taylor. On F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE MOENS DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO ENJOIN THE STATE COURT PROCEEDING FILED BY THE ESTATE OF GERALD RALPH BOGE
*681TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................681
A. Factual Background.................................................681
B. Procedural Background..............................................682
1. The f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a products liability case involving allegations that the defendant’s automobile brakes, containing ehrysotile asbestos fibers, caused the decedent’s lung cancer.1 This ease is set for trial on May 20, 2013, and among the thirty pre-trial motions filed is a motion to reconsider the denial of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.2 See Def.’s Mot. for Recons., ECF...
Views: 0
ORDER Linehaul Logistics, Inc., moves for summary judgment on Arlene Joseph’s claim that Linehaul wrongfully terminated her employment because it retaliated against her for reporting unpaid overtime. Linehaul argues that the claim is barred by res judicata. Linehaul also moves for sanctions under Rule 11. Both motions are well taken for the reasons set forth below. Background Linehaul terminated J...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff DRFP, LLC dba Syke Ventures (“Plaintiff’), brings this action under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., asserting counts against Defendants the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the Venezuelan Ministry of Finance’s (“Defendants”) for default on promissory notes; estoppel/detrimental reliance; breach of contract; promissory esto...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Through this action, Plaintiff Jorge Mon-terrubio (“Plaintiff’) alleges that Defendant Best Buy Stores, L.P. (“Defendant”), failed to reimburse Best Buy supervisors and managers for the use of their personal vehicles for business. In particular, Plaintiff alleges violations of California Labor Code section 2802 and California Business and Professions Code section 17200 on beh...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
STYRENE INFORMATION AND )
RESEARCH CENTER, INC., and )
)
DART CONTAINER CORPORATION, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant HSBC Retail Services Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof, filed July 20, 2012 (Doc. 38)(“Motion to Dismiss”). The Court held a hearing on September 21, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiff Robert B. Fishback’s Complaint for Damages, Declaratory, and Injunct...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHANNON MARIE SMITH, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 13-420 (JEB)
KAYA HENDERSON, Chancellor of the
District of Columbia Public Schools, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendant Arab Bank moves under Rule 44.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “to submit evidence of foreign law.” That Rule provides: A party who intends to raise an issue about a foreign country’s law must give notice by a pleading or other writing. In determining foreign law, the court may consider any relevant material or source, including testimony, whether or not submitted by a p...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Petitioner Roberto Soto-Beltran (“SotoBeltran”), acting pro se, filed a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence (the “§ 2255 Petition”). Soto-Beltran is currently serving a sentence of 120 months after pleading guilty to one count of conspiracy to import heroin and cocaine into the United States, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963, and *3...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART FORD’S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIMS [U]
At this case’s core is two dealership contract disputes between Plaintiff Ford Motor Company and two dealership defendants: Defendant Ghreiwati Auto (Auto) and Defendant Orient Development General Trading Co., L.L.C. (Orient). The Auto and Orient contracts are almost identical and there...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Appellants County of Clinton and Joseph W. Giroux, as the Clinton County Treasurer, (collectively “Clinton”), appeal from an order of the Bankruptcy Court (Littlefield, C.J.), filed October 18, 2012, which denied Clinton’s motion for summary judgment, and granted appellee Warehouse at Van Burén Street, Inc.’s cross-motion for summary judgment. For t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND TO VACATE TRIAL AND JUDGMENT AND/OR FOR A NEW TRIAL
In DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND TO VACATE TRIAL AND JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PERKINS AND MILLER (1) BECAUSE OF IRREGULARITIES; (2) FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION; (3) PURSUANT TO THE COURT’S INHERENT POWERS OR RULE 59 Or. 60, AND/OR FOR A NEW TRIAL PURSUANT TO RULE 59...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a disability and housing discrimination ease. Pending is Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 28). Also pending is Plaintiffs counter-motion for partial summary judgment (Doc. 36) on her reasonable accommodation claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12132; 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7), and the Fair Housing Act (FHA), 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).1
Jur...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CASE is before me on the United States of America’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 22. I have reviewed the arguments, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. For the reasons provided, Plaintiffs Motion is granted. I. Background Plaintiff seeks to revoke and set aside the . order admitting Jose Gomez (“Defenda...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
The matter before the Court is the sentencing of defendant Michael Abraham. A two-count indictment charged Abraham with receipt and distribution of child pornography, and possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(2) and 2252(a)(4)(B). Filing 1. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Abraham pleaded guilty to count one (receipt and distribution)...
Views: 0
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT are Plaintiff, TemPay, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendants (Dkt. 96), Constandina Biltres’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendants (Dkt. 101), Otto Biltres’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendants (Dkt. 102), Biltres Staffing of Tampa Bay, LLC’s Memorandum in Oppo...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (D.E. 42)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. 42), filed on January 17, 2013. Plaintiff filed his Response (D.E. 50) on February 1, 2013, to which Defendant filed its Reply (D.E. 51) on February 11, 2013. Upon review of the Motion, the Response, the Reply, and the record, the Court finds as follow...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is the United States of America’s (“United States” or “the government”) motion to quash two subpoenas served on two federal law enforcement agents. (Docket No. 179.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES the government’s motion to quash defendant’s subpoena on Agent Eduardo Fonseca-Colon and GRANTS the government’s motion to quash subpoena on Agen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiff Catlin (Syndicate 2003) at Lloyd’s (“plaintiff Catlin”)’s motion for reconsideration. Having considered plaintiff Catlin’s motion and memorandum of law (Docket Nos. 114 & 115), as well as defendant San Juan Towing & Marine Services, Inc.’s opposition (Docket No. 118), the Court finds that it enjoys *258both diversity and admiralty jurisdiction ov...
Views: 0
ORDER
Now before the Court are two Motions. First, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on December 28, 2012. (Doc. 8) Plaintiffs filed a Response on January 17, 2013. (Docs. 14-15) Second, Defendants filed a Supplemental Motion to Dismiss on February 19, 2013. (Doc. 16) Plaintiffs filed a Response on March 5, 2013. (Doc. 17) After reviewing the parties’ briefing, the evidence, and the applicab...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT FOLLOWING REMAND
Introduction
After a bench trial in this certified consumer class action, certain overdraft practices by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. that imposed hundreds of millions of dollars in overdraft fees on depositors were held unfair and fraudulent. Our court of appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part. On remand, plaintiffs...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CLASS CERTIFICATION
Forty-five years ago Judge Lumbard of the United States Court of Appeals for this Circuit called a case a “Frankenstein monster posing as a class action.” Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 391 F.2d 555, 572 (2d Cir.1968) (Judge Lumbard dissenting from remand).1 The description fits the class aspects of this case.
The putative class consists of every pers...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Loftex USA LLC (“Loftex”) brings this action against Trident Limited and Trident Group Limited (collectively, “Trident”), alleging that Trident has infringed and continues to infringe Loftex’s U.S. Patent No. 7,810,308 (“the '308 Patent”), in violation of *37735 U.S.C. § 271 et seq. Trident brings a counterclaim against Loftex, seeking, inter alia, a declaration that the '308 Pa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION On August 22, 2012, plaintiff Fortinet, Inc. (“Fortinet”) filed a complaint against defendant FireEye, Inc. (“FireEye”) alleging infringement of two of its U.S. Patents. (D.I. 1) On August 28, 2012, Fortinet filed an amended complaint adding infringement allegations of four other of its U.S. Patents. (D.I. 8) Presently before the court are FireEye’s motions to tr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On July 19, 2012, Versata Software, Inc. and Versata Development Group, Inc. (collectively, “Versata”) filed a complaint against defendant Callidus Software Inc.’s (“Callidus”) alleging that certain Callidus software, “including Callidus’ SPM Suite, and specifically including Callidus’ True-Comp and TrueProducer products” (collectively “the accused products”), i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendant United Parcel Service’s (“UPS”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Concetta M. Sawyers’ First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 15). Sawyers alleges harassment, sex and religious discrimination, and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. (2012). (ECF No. 11). The Cour...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs motion to remand this action to the Circuit Court of Mason County, ECF No. 10, and Defendants’ motion to stay pending transfer to federal multidistrict litigation, ECF No. 21. For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to stay and GRANTS Plaintiffs motion to remand.
I. BACKGROUND
In January 2013, the State of...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case concerns the constitutionality of the State of Arizona’s denial of driver’s licenses to persons commonly known as “DREAMers.”1 On June 15, 2012, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), announced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program, which provides deferred action for a period of two years to certain eligible DREAMers (here...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Defendant DePuy Spine, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (Dkt. 22), Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition (Dkt. 30), and Defendant’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 33). Upon consideration of all relevant filings and case law, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dis...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ February 18, 2013 Motion to Dismiss Complaint [DE-5], Defendants’ March 17, 2013 Supplemental Authority [DE-8], Plaintiffs March 14, 2013 Response [DE-9], Plaintiffs March 25, 2013 Response [DE-10] and Defendants’ March 25, 2013 Reply [DE-11] and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, finds as follows: 1. On January 9, 2012, Wells Fargo...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Medtronic, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Dispositive Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Peggy McClelland’s (“Plaintiff’) Second Amended Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”) (Doc. 45). Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (“Response”) (Doc. 46), to which Defendant replied (Doc. 52). For the following reasons, Defendant’s Motion...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
Four proposed intervenors—the Estate of Daniel Wultz, Sheryl Wultz, Yekutiel “Tuly” Wultz, and Amanda Wultz (“Intervenors”)— seek to join this action as plaintiffs, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a), (b). They argue that their intervention is timely and as of right; the existing plaintiffs in this action vehemently disagree. For the reasons set forth below, the Court...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon four motions filed by Defendants: Defendant Island Hotel Company Limited’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint [DE 49]; Defendants Robert Rothschild, Jonathan Oberti and Garret Wittels’ Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint [DE 62]; Defendant Island Hotel Company Limited’s Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 69]; an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM I. Introduction Plaintiff Joseph McGunigle, a former Quincy police officer, brings a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants the City of Quincy, Chief of Police Paul Keenan, and Captain John Dougan. Plaintiff claims that while he was a Quincy police officer, Defendants retaliated against him for protected speech in violation of his First Amendment and Equal Protection Clause r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before us in this protracted international commercial dispute are cross-motions for summary judgment by plaintiff and counterclaim defendant Cataldo Pirito (“Pirito”) and defendants and counterclaim plaintiffs Penn Engineering & Manufacturing Corp. (“Penn Engineering”) and Penn Engineering World Holdings (“Penn World”). After initial consideration of the submissions we ordered supple...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 04-2070 (GK)
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP,
INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDU...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is befox-e the Court on plaintiffs objections to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay’s decisions regai’ding the nondisclosure by the United States Seci’et Sexvice of cex-tain documents during discovery. Plaintiff contends that the Coui’t should set aside certain poi’tions of Judge Kay’s Febi’uary 3, 2012 Memorandum Order and his September 27, 2012 Memorandum Oi’der as eleai’...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL Civil Action No. 13-617 (CKK)
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Defendant,
LAKE CARRIERS' ASSOCIATION, et al.,
Defendant-Intervenors.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BANNER HEALTH f/b/o BANNER GOOD
SAMARITAN MEDICAL CENTER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 10-01638 (CKK)
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services,
Defendan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On July 18, 2012, the Plaintiff Christa Lorenz (“the Plaintiff’), commenced this action against the Defendant, GE Capital Retail Bank (“GE Capital” or “the Defendant”), alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and the New York General Business Law § 349 (“NYGBL § 349”), as well as causes of action for negligence, negligent supervisio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is co-defendant Jose Perez Riera’s (“Perez Riera”) motion to quash summons and to dismiss the complaint for insufficient service of process (Docket No. 79), Plaintiffs opposition (Docket No. 81), and Perez Riera’s reply to the opposition (Docket No. 82-1). Upon reviewing the filings and the applicable law, Perez Riera’s motion to quash summons is GRA...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiffs’ motion is granted and Defendants’ motion is denied. As threshold matters, Plaintiffs have standing to challenge the Forest Service’s failure to reinitiate section 7 consultation on the programmatic plan amendment at issue here, and the Court has jurisdiction to consider the cas...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO ESTABLISH ERISA STANDARD OF REVIEW
In this action for review of termination of Plaintiffs long term disability benefits, Defendants filed a motion to establish the applicable standard of review under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”). Defendants argue that an abuse of discretion standard applies. Plaintiff filed an ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS Plaintiffs Bradley Englebrick and Roxanne Hernandez (“Plaintiffs”) brought this products liability action against Defendants Worthington Industries, Inc. (‘WII”) *902and Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC (“WCW”) (together, “Worthington”), asserting that they suffered severe burns and other physical and emotional injuries after an allegedly defective ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
On November 13, 2012, Steven Viggiano, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated persons, filed a class action complaint in state court against Hansen Natural Corporation, and various affiliated companies (collectively “Hansen”).1 The action was removed to this court on December 17, 2012.2 On January 25, 2013, Viggiano filed a first amended compl...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Prolitec Inc. (“Prolitec”) filed this action against the Defendant ScentAir Technologies (“ScentAir”), a competitor in fragranced air delivery systems — also referred to in the industry as “liquid diffusion devices.” Prolitec alleges that ScentAir is infringing United States Patent Numbers 7,930,068 (the “'068 patent”) and 7,712,683 (the “'683 patent”). Each patent is...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the court on the motion of defendant Regions Bank to compel arbitration, pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act. See 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq. Plaintiff Ernestine Hawkins has responded in opposition to the motion, and the court, having considered the memoranda and submissions of the parties, concludes that the motion is well taken and should be granted.
The instant mo...
Views: 0
*1185 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS Pending before the court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 9. At issue is whether Defendants’ offer of judgment for the full amount of Plaintiffs statutory-damages but which limits costs and attorney’s fees as of the date of the offer of judgment renders Plaintiffs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On April 30, 2010, plaintiff Stephen J. Topalian (“plaintiff’ or “Topalian”), a former employee of Alstate Insurance Com*299pany (“Allstate”), commenced this action against Hartford Life Insurance Company (“defendant” or “Hartford”), pursuant to § 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), challenging Hartford’s terminatio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
The City of New York (the “City”) here sues certain online cigarette sellers, those sellers’ cigarette suppliers, and several dozen of those sellers’ buyers (and downstream sellers), for violations of the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2341, et seq., (the “CCTA”) and of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt *263Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court is a motion for summary judgment filed by defendant National Vision, Inc. (“NVI”). (Doc. 39). The motion seeks dismissal of the above-entitled action brought by plaintiff Aretha M. Edwards (“Edwards”). Edwards, a black female, sued NVI, her former employer, for race discrimination and harassment in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“ § 1981”) and Title VII of th...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
A leading trademark treatise raises this question in one of its final chapters: “Is it trademark infringement if a fictional company or product in a movie or television drama bears the same name or brand as a real company or product?” 6 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 31:149 (4th ed.). The treatise immediately goes on to note that “[t]here is surprisingly littl...
Views: 0
*787
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
This case brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was tried to the court on September 24-28, 2012. The parties consented to the jurisdiction of this magistrate judge for all purposes, including final judgment (Dkt. 18). At issue is League City’s alleged policy of targeting day laborers and applying (and mis-applying) state laws to prevent them from soliciting...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the findings and recommendation entered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart on April 8, 2013, 2013 WL 4781096 (filing 18). Judge Zwart recommends (1) that the plaintiffs motion to remand (filing 11) be granted, and the case remanded to the District Court of Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, and (2) that the plaintiffs motion to change the locat...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
The parties in this case have come to the Court requesting a determination of the rights of plaintiff Theodore Brennan (“Ted”)1 and of defendant Owen E. Brennan, Jr. (“Pip”) as shareholders, officers, and/or directors of plaintiff Brennan’s, Inc. (“Brennan’s, Inc.” or the “corporation”), along with related relief. The Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
The Court will not attempt...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff Darryl Long’s Motion for Condi*297tional Class Certification and Court Authorized Notice under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). (Doc. No. 43). For the reasons set forth herein, Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED. I. BACKGROUND Defendant CPI Security Systems, Inc. (“Defendant” or “CPI”) designs, installs, monitors and servi...
Views: 0
OPINION
Y.A., the defendant in this case, is a young man, now twenty-one years old, who allegedly committed two murders at age seventeen as part of his membership in the transnational gang MS-13. Y.A. is currently charged and treated as a juvenile; for almost two years, this case has proceeded under seal, and Y.A. has been protected by special, modified court procedures to accommodate his unique ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
I.
INTRODUCTION
On August 28, 2012, plaintiffs L.H. and B.H. (“Parents”), along with their minor child, M.H. (“Student”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), filed a Complaint for attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. (“Complaint,” Dkt. No. 4). On August 29, 2012, Defenda...
Views: 0
ORDER
Currently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (# 51). The Court heard oral argument on March 26, 2012.
The Clerk’s Office inadvertently closed this case on March 26, 2012, and did not enter this order as a result. The Clerk’s Office reopened this case on April 1, 2013, and now enters this order.
BACKGROUND
I. Complaint
On November 22, 2010,1 Plaintiff Charlotte Weath...
Views: 0
Page 70575
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs are Government Employees Insurance Co., GEICO Indemnity Co., GEICO General Insurance Company, and GEICO Casualty Co. (collectively, “GEI-CO”). Defendants are Uptown Health Care Management, Inc. d/b/a New York Neuro and Rehabilitation Center d/b/a East Tremont Medical Center (“East Tremont”); Hisham Elzanaty; Alan Golden-berg; Dr. Hisham Ahmed a/k/a Hisham El Sherb...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Those who don’t believe in ghosts have never been in court, where legal claims are regularly seen rising from the grave. This is a case in point.
On January 19, 2012, plaintiffs Dexia SA/NV, Dexia Holdings, Inc., FSA Asset Management LLC (“FSAM”), and Dexia Crédit Local SA filed this action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, alleging state law clai...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND (Dkt. No. 20)
Plaintiff filed this putative state law wage and hour class action in Alameda *985County Superior Court. Defendants BBVA Compass Insurance Agency, Inc. (“BBVA Compass”) and Compass Bank (collectively “Defendants”) subsequently removed the case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) of 2005. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(d), ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (Doc. no. 28.) For the following reasons, this motion is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Zometa and Osteonecrosis of the Jaw
Zometa is a bisphosphonate medication prescribed to patients with hypercalcemia of malignancy, multiple myeloma, or certain kinds of cancer that have metastasized to the bones. (Doc. no. 28, Ex...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE; GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE
Plaintiffs Chris Germain and Piping Rock Partners, Inc. (“Piping Rock”) have filed a second amended and restated complaint (“SAC”) against David Lerner Associates, Inc. (“DLA”) and two individuals, DLA’s president David Lerner and former DLA employee George Dobbs, for libel.1 Defendants DLA and Lerne...
Views: 1
Page 70681
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Pending before the Court is a motion to dismiss filed by the Defendants pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1)1 and 12(b)(6). Docket Nos. 14 & 17. For the reasons that follow, that motion will be granted in part and denied in part. The Plaintiff will be ordered to file a more definite statement in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Represented by counsel, Patricia M. Cozan-Pierce (“Plaintiff’), brings this action pursuant to Title II of the Social Security Act (“the Act”), seeking review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”). This Court has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on United States Steel Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 27], filed by Defendant United States Steel Corporation (“U.S. Steel”) on November 29, 2012. For the reasons set forth in this Opinion and Order, the Court grants the motion.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. EEOC Charge 24E-2010-00219— Disability Discrimination
Prior to the instituti...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
ARI BAILEY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE AND FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT UG-WUONYE This matter is before the Court on a Motion by Plaintiff, the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (hereinafter “the Embassy”), to Show Cause and for Sanctions against Defendant Ephraim Emeka Ugwuo-nye. See Dkt. # 117. The Embassy re*55quests that, as a result of egregious discovery misconduct by Mr. Ugw...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE CONVICTION AND FOR NEW TRIAL ON COUNT VII (Dkt. No. 174) I. INTRODUCTION This motion presents the court with a simple question: to obtain a conviction for making a false statement under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, must the government prove, in the context of this case, that Defendant knew, or should have known, that he was in fact speaking to a gov...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
COMPTEL )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action for the infringement of a patent for a non-invasive thermometer. The case was tried to a jury, which returned a verdict finding that defendant BestMed LLC (“BestMed”) willfully infringed on U.S. Patent No. 7,597,668 (“the '668 Patent”), of which plaintiff Medisim Ltd. (“Medisim”) is the sole assignee and owner. The jury also found that BestMed...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this medical malpractice action filed by Sandra Quinn, individually and as administratrix of the estate her deceased infant daughter, E.Q., and Peter Quinn, individually (“Plaintiffs”) against the United States; Mary Allen, D.O. (“Dr. Allen”); and Samaritan Medical Center (“SMC”) (collectively, “Defendants”), are motions for partial summary judg...
Views: 0
Page 70884
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. 78)
This case involves a dispute over the use of certain ingredients contained in the formula for the liquid dietary supplement 5-Hour Energy. Innovation Ventures, LLC, d/b/a Living Essentials (“Plaintiff’) manufactures and distributes 5-Hour Energy throughout the United States. Plaintiff initially contracted with Defendant C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on Defendant Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.’s “Motion for Summary Judgment.” (Doc. 45). Plaintiff Ross Williams claims that DSI discriminated against him on the basis of his gender and retaliated against him because another DSI employee, District Manager Philip Lamb, filed an EEOC Charge against DSI. DSI argues that no genuine issue of material fact exi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
I. Introduction
This is a case based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”), and Alabama law. Curtis Johnson (“Plaintiff’) claims his former employer, Gestamp Alabama, LLC (“Gestamp”), discriminated against him on account of his race...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the following filings:
1. Defendants City of Gahanna and Gahanna Finance Director Jennifer Teal’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Fifth Amendment claim (ECF No. 14), Plaintiffs’ response (ECF No. 20), and the Gahanna Defendants’ reply (ECF No. 27);
2. Defendant Regional Income Tax Agency’s (“RITA”) motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. ...
Views: 0
ORDER THAT: (1) THE ALJ’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING IS FOUND NOT SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND IS REVERSED; AND (2) JUDGMENT SHALL BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AWARDING BENEFITS
This is a Social Security disability benefits appeal. At issue is whether the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) erred in finding the Plaintiff “not disabled” and therefore unentitled to disability insurance benef...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant, PNC Bank, National Association’s (“PNC[’s]”) Motion for Summary Final Judgment ... (“Motion”) [ECF No. 104], together with a Statement of Material Facts (“Defendant’s SMF”) [ECF No. 103], both filed on February 19, 2013. Plaintiffs, Dantzler, Inc. and Dantzler Trade, Inc. (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Dantzler”), filed a Response and Incorp...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case concerns claims by Plaintiff AFL Telecommunications LLC (“AFL”) against Defendants Surplus EQ.Com Incorporated (“SurplusEQ”), Tech Sales LLC (“Tech Sales”), Daniel Parsons, and Lisa Parsons (collectively, “Defendants”) for unfair competition, false advertising, and copyright infringement arising from Defendants’ sale of fusion splicers (devices used to splice fiber optic cable) ma...
Views: 0
ORDER
On March 19, 2013, the Court granted Defendant, City of Miami’s (“Cityt’s]”) Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 12] Plaintiff, Lee R. Pelcher’s (“Pelcher[’s]”) Complaint by default, due to Pelcher’s failure to oppose the Motion by filing a timely response as required by Local Rule 7.1(c). (See Order [ECF No. 22]). Pelcher was allowed to file an amended complaint, which he eventually did on April ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This action is just one case of many in what can only be referred to as an onslaught of litigation commenced by pornographic movie producers, alleging direct and indirect copyright infringement based upon the accused illegal downloading of them works through BitTorrent technology. Presently before the Court is the Defendant John Doe’s motion to dismiss the complai...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Marjorie Focarazzo (“plaintiff’) brings this action against her former employer, the University of Rochester (the “University”), alleging age-based discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (“ADEA”) and the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290 et seq. (“NYHRL”). Discovery is now completed, and th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court is Plaintiffs Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 55), filed on January 17, 2013 and Plaintiffs Motion to Strike (Doc. # 100), filed on April 23, 2013. The Motion for Summary *1211Judgment has been fully briefed (See Docs. #89, #90, #93, #98, #99) and was deemed submitted without oral argument on April 23, 2013. For the reasons outlined below, the Mot...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS In this action, Defendant Andre Gilmore (“Defendant”) is charged in Count 1 of the Indictment with unlawful possession of a firearm by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). (ECF No. 9.) This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s *1214Motion to Suppress (“Motion”). (ECF No. 13.) Defendant’s Motion seeks suppression of the evidenc...
Views: 0
RULING RE: PLAINTIFFS’ RENEWED MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 90)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs James Costello and Aron Moore bring this action against defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Home Depot”), alleging that they were not paid for overtime work in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (the “FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 207, because they were misclassified as “exempt” employees. Pla...
Views: 4
ORDER
This copyright infringement ease is “one of hundreds if not thousands of lawsuits involving the use of BitTorrent technology which have been filed throughout the nation.” Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 923 F.Supp.2d 1339, 1341, 2013 WL 525352, at *1 (M.D.Fla. 2013). Voltage Pictures, LLC seeks injunctive relief plus damages against the defendants, unidentified infringers of Voltage’s film, Max...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
On February 6, 2013, plaintiffs Sun-Trust Banks, Inc. (“SunTrust Banks”) and SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc. (“STRH”) filed this action against defendants Turnberry Capital Management LP and Turnberry Master, Ltd., seeking to prevent defendants from proceeding with an arbitration they had commenced against plaintiffs before the Financial Industry Regulatory...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS LSI CORPORATION AND AGERE SYSTEMS LLC’S MOTION TO STAY
This dispute concerns whether a holder of patents essential to an industry standard (“standard-essential patents”) may *1001commence an action before the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) pursuant to Section 337 of...
Views: 5
Page 71325
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(e) (Dk. 22), and on the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file first amended complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2). (Dk. 31). Asserting diversity and subject matter jurisdiction, the plaintiffs, collectively referred to as “Martin Marietta,” are suing due to...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
Plaintiffs in this contract case, parties to form contracts with a defunct talent agency, Be., LLC (“Be”),1 move for class certification. See dkt. 187. The Court GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES it in part.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs say that Be, using a manipulative sales pitch designed to convince parents that their chi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, filed by Defendant Dilip Barot (“Barot”) [Docket Entry # 3]. For the reasons stated below, the Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
I. BACKGROUND
This action arises from Barot’s alleged fraudulent -actions in connection with the efforts of Plaintiff Laird A. Fairchild (“Fairchild”)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Lawrence Rasche’s motions for summary judgment. [DN 268, 270, 272, 278, 279]. Also before the Court is Defendant American General Life Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment. [DN 281] Fully briefed, these matters are ripe for decision. For the following reasons, the Court DENIES in part and GRANTS in part the Def...
Views: 0
Page 71525
*609
MEMORANDUM OPINION
James G. Davis Construction Corporation (“Davis”) is a Virginia corporation with its principal place of business in Maryland. Erie Insurance Exchange (“Erie”) is a commercial insurance provider formed as an unincorporated association in Pennsylvania.1 Davis has sued Erie for breach of contract arising out of Erie’s refusal to pay the costs of Davis’s legal defense in a t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff BP Environmental Services, Inc (“BP”) brought suit against Defendant Republic Services, Inc. (“Republic”), claiming tortious interference with its existing and prospective contracts as well as breach of contract. Republic moved for summary judgment on all counts. For the reasons explained below, I will grant Republic’s motion.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND1
Plaintiff BP is a Pennsylv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This matter has its genesis in a land development project in the City of Scranton, and involves a decision by the Scranton City Council to table a resolution authorizing the project after it had been approved by the City Planning Commission and City Engineer. On February 14, 2008, Plaintiff Northeast Land Development, LLC, (“Northeast”) brought suit agai...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
The above-captioned action is a bankruptcy appeal from an Order of United States Bankruptcy Judge Diane Davis dismissing an amended complaint in an adversary proceeding filed by Richard G. Rosetti and Plaza 7, LLC (“Plaintiffs”) seeking to deny Michael J. Dranichak (“Debtor”) a discharge in bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A) and (B). For the reasons set forth below, Pl...
Views: 2
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiff Bennie Starks was convicted of aggravated criminal sexual assault, attempted aggravated criminal sexual assault, and aggravated battery in the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois. Doc. 95 at ¶ 40. In 2006, after 20 years in prison, Starks was released after the Appellate Court of Illinois vacated the two sexual assault convictions. Id. at ¶ 48. Starks the...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause comes before the court on the motion of defendant Otis Tyrone Powell to draw the jury venire in this case from the Greenville division. This court previously denied this motion in a ruling from the bench, and it enters this written order to explain that ruling. In seeking to draw the jury venire in this case from the Greenville division, defendant relies upon the fact that he is...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This suit arises out of Plaintiff Jennifer Poindexter’s resignation, which she argues was a constructive discharge. Plaintiff, a former employee of the Alabama Department of Human Resources (“DHR”), alleges that DHR, the Alabama State Personnel Board, and five of the agencies’ current and former employees violated Plaintiffs constitutional right to procedural due pr...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The plaintiff in this case, Telsmith, Inc., manufactures crushing and mineral-processing equipment for the global mining and aggregate industries. One of its products is known as a “track plant.” This is a mobile crushing device used to crush large pieces of rock and other material into smaller pieces. The heart of the track plant is a “jaw crusher,” which is a motor-driven d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss, filed by the defendant, Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA” or “Defendant”1). (Doc. 23.) The issues raised in Defendant’s motion have been fully briefed by all parties, and are now ripe for decision. For the reasons described below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is due to be GRANTED in part, DENIED in part, and partially DEFERR...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss, filed by the defendant, Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA” or “Defendant”1). (Doc. 10.) The issues raised in Defendant’s motion have been fully briefed by all parties, and are now ripe for decision. For the reasons described below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is due to be GRANTED in part, DENIED in part, and partially DEFERR...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DKTS. 72 & 73)
Before the Court are two Motions for Summary Judgment brought by Defendants Radient Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“Radient”) (Dkt. 72) and by Defendants Douglas C. MacLellan (“MacLellan”) and Akio Ariura (“Ariura”) (Dkt. 73). After considering all papers filed and oral argument, the Court DENIES Rad...
Views: 1
ORDER Petitioner Hani Abdullah, a Yemeni national detained at Guantánamo Bay, has *66filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking an order releasing him unless his detention complies with the Third Geneva Convention, and directing the respondents to treat him in accord with the Yemen Agreement, an executive agreement between Yemen and the United States signed in 1946.1 See Petitr.’s Mot. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Defendant Justin Rego has filed a petition for a writ of coram nobis seeking to vacate his 2010 conviction for being a Felon in Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). His petition is based upon his unavailing arguments that his predicate offenses resulted in sentences of less than one year and thus were not properly considered felonies.
Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Kristen Cook (“Cook” or “plaintiff’) alleges that her employer, defendant Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (“ENOI” or “defendant”), discriminated against her on the basis of disability and gender.
I. Background
Cook is employed at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant (“the Plant”) in Plymouth, Massachusetts, which is owned by ENOI. Defendant is a Delaware corporation with ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS
(Dkt. No. 8)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs have filed this class action lawsuit against two cable companies, seeking to recover damages for rebates not credited automatically following cable, Internet, and phone service outages caused by an unusually heavy snowstorm in October of 2011. Defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint. For the reasons discus...
Views: 0
Page 71804
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS THE ASPIRE GROUP OF OHIO, LLC’S AND WESTERN SURETY COMPANY’S MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOCS. 20, 24)
This is a Miller Act case brought by a supplier of labor and materials — against a subcontractor, the prime contractor and the prime contractor’s bonding company— to recover payment for services allegedly rendered.1 See 40 U.S.C. § 3131 et seq. This matter is ...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Hector Perez, appearing pro se, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging claims arising out of certain events that occurred during 2008, while plaintiff was confined at the Monroe Coun*414ty (New York) Jail (“Jail”). At the time that he filed the complaint in this action, plaintiff was an inmate in the custody of the New York Department of Correctional Ser...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter comes before the court on the Petitioner’s “Request for Leave to File Response to Affidavit by Counsel Kimball Based upon Factors Beyond Petitioner’s Control” (“Request”), filed pro se on April 15, 2013 (ECF No. 73), together with an attached “Petitioner Rebuttal to Affidavit of Counselor Kimball” (“Rebuttal Affidavit”), dated February 24, 2013 (ECF No. 73-1); and “Petitioner’s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Indictment in this case charges 36 defendants with conspiracy to commit racketeering, health care fraud, mail fraud, and money laundering in connection with an allegedly fraudulent no-fault insurance scheme. Presently before the Court are several pretrial motions filed by certain Defendants. Oral argument on these motions was held on April 19, 2013. For the reasons set ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Malibu Media, LLC (“Malibu”) brought suit in this Court against six unnamed individuals (“Doe Defendants”) alleging direct and contributory copyright infringement in violation of the United States Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. (R. 1, Compl. ¶¶ 48-64.) On November 8, 2012, the Court dismissed the complaint without prejudice to the filing of a proper ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is an appeal of a final declaratory judgment entered on July 6, 2012, in an adversary proceeding before the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. Before this court are the Brief for Appellants Terry Christopher Bounds and Diana Bounds filed October 31, 2012 (Clerk’s Doc. No. 3), the Joint Brief for Appellees Lyn...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On September 25, 2012, the Plaintiff Wego Chemical & Mineral Corp. (“the Plaintiff’ or “Wego”) commenced this action against the Defendant Magnablend Inc. (“the Defendant” or “Magnablend”), asserting a single cause of action for breach of contract. Presently before the Court is a motion by the Defendant to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Fed....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On November 25, 2009, two days after the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) and defendant Stork Craft announced the recall of millions of Stork Craft’s drop-side cribs,1 plaintiff sued Stork Craft and Wal-Mart to recover for injuries she claims to have suffered as the owner of one of the recalled cribs. Plaintiffs original complaint asserted n...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, the City of New York (“the City”), brought this action seeking injunc-tive relief, penalties, and damages for violations of the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (“PACT Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 375 et seq.; the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act (“CCTA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2341 et seq.; the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act (“CMSA”), N.Y. Tax L. § 483 et seq.; and the Rac...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS TOR OLSON’S AND BRANDON RICHTER’S MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL
In this action, the Government charges Defendants Executive Recycling, Brandon Richter, and Tor Olson with eleven counts of wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343), two counts of mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341), one count of a violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) (42 U.S.C. § 6928(d)(4) and 6 C.C.R. 1007-3...
Views: 0
Page 72053
OPINION
Presently before the Court is a motion to partially dismiss by Defendants Georgia-Pacific, LLC and Georgia-Pacific Woods Products, LLC (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendants” and/or “GP”) three counts of a consumer class action Amended Complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The instant motion arises out of an Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff Francis E. Parker Mem...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In this diversity action, Plaintiff Kuvedina, LLC (“Kuvedina”) seeks damages arising from disputes in its business relationship with Defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation (“Cognizant”) and alleged fraud perpetrated by Defendants Mahesh Kashyap (“Kashyap”) and Crystalsoft, Inc. (“Crystalsoft”). Kashyap and Crystalsoft move to dismiss Kuvedina’s claims, ECF No...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND; AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT
I. INTRODUCTION
At issue is whether, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a national bank is a citizen solely of the state in which its main office is located, as identified in its articles of association (the “state of association”), or is also a citizen of the state in which its principal place of ...
Views: 0
ORDER
On November 13, 2012, the Tendering PHONES Holders (“Movants”) sought leave from Judge Pauley, to whom this ease was previously assigned, to file a motion to intervene as Plaintiffs in the Note Holders Actions, which are part of this multidistrict litigation (“MDL”).1 On January 29, 2013, the Tendering PHONES Holders filed the instant motion (Doe. No. 80). The Defendants’ Executive Commit...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________
)
PATRICK RUSSELL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 07-2212 (RWR)
)
HARMAN IN...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (ECF No. 7) requires the Court to determine whether Plaintiffs’ state law claims are completely preempted under § 502(a)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3). If Plaintiffs’ claims are completely preempted, this Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over those claims, and Defendant’s removal of t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Raymond G. Perelman (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against his former lawyer and friend, Defendant Arlin Adams (“Defendant”), in connection with a series of business transactions that took place in January 1990.1 Plaintiff filed his complaint on September 14, 2012 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss 11, ECF No. 13...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter is now before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. For the reasons that follow, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED on the issue of personal jurisdiction, but GRANTED on the issue of failure to state a claim.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, EEI Holding Corporation (“Plaintiff’), is an Illinois corpora...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Gregory F. Robinson (“plaintiff’), is an inmate at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (‘VCC”), Smyrna, Delaware, who proceeds pro se and has been granted in forma pauperis status. He filed this complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming violations of his constitutional rights.1 (D.I. 3) In addition, plaintiff requests counsel. (D.I. 5) II. STA...
Views: 0
*329
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Akiro LLC (“Akiro”) filed this action against defendants House of Cheat-ham, Inc. (“HOC”) and Robert H. Bell, asserting claims for trademark infringement and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, and for unfair competition and trademark dilution under New York law. By stipulation and order signed by the Court on March 4, 2013, the claims against defendant B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Project Reflect, Inc. Smithson Craighead Middle School, a nonprofit charter school, and two parents of children enrolled in the school bring this putative class action lawsuit against the Metropolitan Nashville Board of Public Education (the “Board”) and individual defendants Metro Nashville Public Schools (“MNPS”) Director of Schools Jesse Register and MNPS Office of Innov...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: SEALED EX PARTE MOTION TO ORDER THE BUREAU OF PRISONS TO PERMIT COUNSEL TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE DEFENDANT (DOCKET ENTRY #29) In a sealed, ex parte motion filed May 7, 2012, defendant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (“the defendant”), presently housed as a pretrial detainee at the Federal Medical Center (FMC) Devens (“FMC Devens”) in Ayer, Massachusetts, requests a court order compell...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
This action, filed February 22, 2012, follows the Pittsfield Township Board of Trustees’ denial of Plaintiffs application to rezone property in Pittsfield Township in *756order to build an Islamic school and community center. Plaintiff is suing Pittsfield Charter Township (...
Views: 0
Page 72376
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS
On May 3, 2013, the Court heard a Partial Motion to Dismiss brought by Defendants Joseph Kosmalski and Rudy Zarate. Shana Molinare, Esq., appeared at the hearing on behalf of Defendants Joseph Kosmalski and Rudy Zarate; Chad Van Brunt, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Melanie Lee Tipps. After reviewing the motion and the supporting and o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner Gearl Flowers (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the' Howard R. Young Correctional Institution in Wilmington, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (D.I. 1), and the State’s motion to dismiss the application without prejudice for failure to exhaust state ...
Views: 0
Page 72395
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
EMBASSY OF THE FEDERAL
REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA,
Civil Action No. 10-cv-1929 (BJR)
Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM OPINION ENTERING
v.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Missouri Insurance Coalition (“MIC”), Health Alliance Life Insurance Co. (“Health Alliance”), and HMO Missouri, Inc., seek a declaration that certain provisions of the recently-enacted Missouri Senate Bill 749, codified at Mo.Rev.Stat. § 376.1199, are void under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution because the state law is in direct conflict wit...
Views: 0
*1152MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs B.S.C. Holding, Inc., and Lyons Salt Company assert this action against Defendant Lexington Insurance Company seeking a declaratory judgment and damages regarding an alleged breach of an insurance contract. This case comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 138). For the reasons articulated below, the Court grants Defendant’s mot...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter, involving allegations of race discrimination and violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act as well as state law claims, is before the court on the following motions: “Defendant Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment” (doc. 37); “Defendants’ Motion *1255for Partial Summary Judgment” (doc. 40) filed by the Pat Donalson Agency and Patrici...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on the motion to dismiss and for partial summary judgment filed by the defendants on August 17, 2012. (Doc. 16). The plaintiff has filed a response, along with a motion to stay consideration of the motion for partial summary judgment. (Doc. 24). Also pending is a motion to reconsider the court’s order granting plaintiff leave to file an affidav...
Views: 0
OPINION Defendant Kimberly Lashun Flowers pled guilty to one count of passing a forged United States Treasury check in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2). Flowers entered her plea pursuant to an agreement with the government according to which the government would recommend a sentence of monitored home confinement rather than imprisonment. At sentencing, the United States Probation Department anno...
Views: 0
Page 72459
OPINION
This is an immigration matter concerning Plaintiff Neil A. Naik (“Plaintiff”)’s Petition for Alien Relative (“1-130 petition”), which he filed on behalf of his wife. Defendant Daniel Renaud is the Director of the Vermont Service Center (“VSC”), which is part of United States Citizenship & Immigration Services (“USCIS”) (collectively “Defendants”). Defendants denied Plaintiff’s 1-130 petit...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This is a dispute between, on the one side, Plaintiff health insurance company Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island (“Blue Cross”), and, on the other, chiropractor Jay S. Korsen and his former employee, occupational therapist Ian D. Barlow, Defendants. The dispute concerns medical services provided by Dr. Korsen and Barlow to patients over a six-year period, and the bills...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment by Plaintiffs Regarding Announcement 2002 and Waiver of Penalties and Memorandum of Law in Support (“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment” or “Plaintiffs’ Motion”) (Doc. No. 103), filed on September 21, 2012, Defendant’s Opposition (Doc. No. 131), filed on November 16, 2012, Plaintiffs’ Reply in support of their Motion (Do...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT ANDREW WEISS’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This action arises out of a series of purchase orders under which the plaintiff, Nationwide Book Industries, LLC (“Nationwide”), agreed to sell more than 216,-000 books to the defendant, A & S Booksellers, Inc. (“A & S”).1 Nationwide claims that it continued to fill orders and ship books to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On April 4, 2013, the Honorable C. Clifford Shirley, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge, filed a 17-page Report and Recommendation (R & R) [Doc. 26] in which he recommended that defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the seizure and search of the defendant on November 11, 2012 [Doc. 19] be granted. Thus, Magistrate Judge Shirley recommended that th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On March 12, 2013, the Court (Wood, J.) issued an Order permitting Petitioners to conduct limited discovery “in order to determine whether the failure [of Respondent] to file the Malaysian set-aside proceeding was due to counsel’s failure to inform Respondent of the deadline, as Mr. Souralay attested; a financial issue, as Mr. Branson later stated; or some other cause.” (Order...
Views: 0
DECISION & ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Bell Independent Power Corp. (“Plaintiff’ or “Bell Independent”) originally brought this action against Defendants Owens-Illinois (“Owens-Illinois”) and Owens Brockway Glass Container Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) in New York State Supreme Court, Monroe County, seeking damages alleged to arise out of common law claims for breach of contract, quantum meruit, and u...
Views: 0
ORDER This FLSA case is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s January 30, 2013 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) which reviewed the parties’ proposed negotiated settlement. The parties have not filed any objections, and the time to do so has now passed. Accordingly, upon independent review, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The dispute in this case is best summarized as whether Plaintiffs, who are married, consented to receive promotional text messages while creating a customer account on Defendants’ website. Absent such consent, it appears that the numerous text messages that Defendants sent to Plaintiffs’ cell phone were ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, Hong Leong Finance Limited (Singapore) (“HLF”) asserts claims against Morgan Stanley and some of its affiliates (collectively “defendants”). Defendants have moved for a protective order staying discovery pending the resolution of their motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint. For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motion for a stay is granted.
I. BACKGROU...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANGELA BLOUNT, et al., for themselves
and those similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-809 (JDB)
U.S. SECURITY ASSOCIATES, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM O...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
SHEILA ALFORD, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND1
Plaintiffs CardioNet, Inc. (“CardioNet”) and LifeWatch Services, Inc. (“Life-Watch”) are the leading suppliers of outpatient cardiac telemetry (“OCT”) services. Compl. ¶ 1. OCT is a real-time, physician-prescribed, cardiac event monitoring service for patients experiencing symptoms of atrial fibrillation that evade detection through the use of shorter term monitoring tec...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The matter before the Court is Defendant Jacob Appelsmith’s, as Director of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 31].
I. JURISDICTION
The Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 2201.
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff Retail Digital Network, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Yasser F. Daoud (“Daoud”) filed the instant suit against the City of Wilmington (“the City”) on November 18, 2010, alleging discriminatory and retaliatory actions based on Daoud’s race, national origin, ancestry, ethnic characteristics, disability, and religion in violation of federal and state laws. (D.I. 1; D.I. 11) In a memorandum opinion and order ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs National Alliance for Accessibility, Inc. (“NAA”), and Denise Payne (“Payne”) seek declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendant Chapel Hill North Properties, LLC (“CHNP”) for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (2006 & Supp.2011) (“ADA”). Before the court is CHNP’s motion to dismiss the compla...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SENECA NATION OF INDIANS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1494 (RMC)
)
...
Views: 0
*792
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The instant case sounds in mortgage fraud. Plaintiffs have filed an eight-Count Complaint totaling forty-six pages. Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss in which they seek the dismissal of each and every Count of the Complaint. The Court has carefully reviewed the record and deems a hearing unnecessary. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES ...
Views: 0
Page 73048
MEMORANDUM RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
I.Introduction
On November 9, 2012, Plaintiff Robert Gorman, a police officer for the City of Chester, Pennsylvania (“Chester”), filed his Second Amended Complaint (ECF 22) asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983— for violations of his First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights—and state law—for false imprisonm...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment On Its Breach-Of-Contract Claim [ECF No. 69] filed on May 9, 2012. The Defendants, the Village of Stevensville and the Village of Stevensville Downtown Development Authority, filed their Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 70] and their Cross-Motion for Summary Jud...
Views: 0
Page 73103
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
NAJMAH RASHAD, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STEVEN TINDAL,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 10-237 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
JOHN MCHUGH,
in his official capacity as Secretary ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. )
WILLIAM ROBIN HOOD, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs/Relators, ) Civil Action No. 11-774 (...
Views: 0
Page 73177
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff filed this action in state court as Administrator of the Estate of Clifton Chad Ingle, deceased, seeking to recover accidental death benefits pursuant to a policy Ingle had with defendant, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Metlife”). Metlife removed the action to this Court under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 2202 et seq. (“ERIS...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are the defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment (Docket # 161), the plaintiffs’ opposition thereto (Docket # 170), and the defendant’s reply (Docket # 173). After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the defendant’s motion is GRANTED. Factual and Procedural Background This is a suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), ...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is the Government’s Motion to Reconsider the Court’s order granting Levon Bazemore’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, ECF No. 35,1 and Bazemore’s Motion to Strike Government’s Motion to Reconsider. ECF No. 37. The Government asserts the Court made a clear error of law when it granted Bazemore’s habeas petition on grounds that the opinion in Stewart v. United State...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT PAYCHEX’S MOTION TO DISMISS; (2) DENYING DEFENDANT PAYCHEX’S MOTION TO STRIKE JURY TRIAL DEMAND
On May 3, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Paychex, Inc., and joined by Defendants UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company and Dennis Walker (collectively, “Defendants”). (Doc. # 5.) Lawrence Smith, Es...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On January 14, 2013, this Court issued an opinion in the above-captioned case granting partial summary judgment to Defendant Daniel Morel (“Morel”) and denying summary judgment to Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Agence France Presse (“AFP”) and Third-Party Counterclaim Defendants Getty Images (US), Inc. (“Getty”), and The Washington Post Company (“the Post”) (collectively, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CHARLES R. GOLDSTEIN, :
Chapter 7 Trustee for K Capital Corp., :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Antoine Parris, brings this pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 *359against the following defendants: Commissioner Brian Fischer, Superintendant William Lee, and Deputy Superintendant Edward Burnett.1 The defendants are employees of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”). The plaintiff alleges that the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Mulch Manufacturing Inc. (“MMI”), brings this diversity action against Defendants, Advanced Polymer Solutions, LLC (“APS”), and John M. Ryan (“Ryan”) (collectively “Defendants”), for various claims including breach of contract and fraud. This matter is before the Court for consideration of APS’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 46) and MMI’s Motion for Partial S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Bridget- Kline-Perry’s (“Defendant”) Rule 60(b) Motion to Vacate the Judgment (“Motion”). [Dkt. 115.] For the following reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s Motion.
I. Background
This case involves allegedly libelous statements made by Defendant about Plaintiff Russell Ebersole (“Plaintiff’) and his pet care business, Aberdeen...
Views: 1
ORDER On July 10, 2012, the court granted the plaintiffs request for production of documents (hospital protocols) but denied without prejudice her request for sanctions against co-defendant Grupo HIMA—San Pablo, Inc. (hereinafter “the Hospital”). See Docket No. 55. After the Hospital’s failure to comply with this court’s order to produce, on September 19, 2012, the Hospital was ordered to “pay t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
COUNCIL FOR UROLOGICAL INTERESTS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-cv-0546 (BJR)
KATHLEEN G. SEBELIUS, in her official Re Document Nos.: 28, 30
capacity as Secretary of the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Dr. William Meyer Roddy, M.D., and his wife, Wendy Sue Roddy, allege that the City of Huntsville, Alabama, and two of its police officers violated rights protected by the United States Constitution and state laws during a series of events that flowed from a search of a Huntsville hotel room shared by the Roddys and their children.1 That search resulted in plaintiffs’ ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is pending for consideration of motions for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation (“Merck”) and Defendant Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway (“AG”). [Record Nos. 64, 65] Both parties contend that there are no genuine issues of material fact. And each asserts that it/he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. For the rea...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
This Order addresses two pending discovery disputes: (1) plaintiffs’ objection to the April 17, 2013 decision of Special Master Theodore H. Katz approving Bank of China, Ltd.’s (“BOC’s”) redactions to certain discovery documents;1 and (2) motions for reconsideration of this Court’s April 9, 2013 Opinion and Order (“April 9 Order”) submitted by BOC and non-party the Office of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On February 15, 2013, the undersigned United States District Judge heard oral argument on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment and on the parties’ motions to exclude expert testimony. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ summary judgment motion is denied. Plaintiffs summary judgment motion is denied in part and granted in part. Plain...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 09-0026 (PLF)
)
RICO RODRIG...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Brian and Melissa Hill brought this lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and LPS Field Services, Inc. The amended complaint alleges: (1) violation by LPS only of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.; (2) violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”), 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq.; (3) common ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, a group of several hundred current and former homeowners, brought this action against several dozen mortgage originators and servicers (collectively “Defendants”), alleging Defendants, inter alia, induced Plaintiffs to enter into mortgages based on inflated appraisals; purposefully avoided local recordation statutes, thereby clouding Plaintiffs’ titles; transfer...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
In this action, Philip Macdonald seeks damages to redress alleged violations of the Fourth Amendment and various state laws arising from a warrantless search of his home and his subsequent prosecution in state court based on the fruits of that search. Defendants Town of Eastham, *237Eastham police officers Norman Sylvia and Kate Mungovan, and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Bruck (“Bruck”) alleges that defendants Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLC and Morgan Stanley & Co., LLC (collectively “Morgan Stanley” or “defendants”) created “an unlawful and fraudulent scheme to avoid the fiduciary duties imposed upon them” by the Investment Advisors Act (“LAA”).
I. Background
Bruck hired defendants in 2007 to manage his assets. He initially...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendants AEP Elmwood LLC (“AEP Elmwood”), AEP River Operations, LLC (“AEP River”), AEP Resources, Inc. (“AEP Resources”), and American Electric Power Company, Inc.’s (“American Electric”) (collectively “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (Rec. Doc. No. 90). In response, *548Plaintiff Anthony LeBlanc filed an opposition. (Rec. Doc. No. 105). Defenda...
Views: 0
*825FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
At issue in this lawsuit are: 1) the cur-' rent policies and practices of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office (“MCSO”) by which it investigates and/or detains persons whom it cannot charge with a state crime but whom it believes to be in the country without authorization, and 2) the operations the MCSO claims a right to use in enforcing immigration-rela...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS A grand jury has indicted Christopher Lee Carlson (“Mr. Carlson” or “Defendant”) and charged him with mailing threatening letters to five U.S. Senators and the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 876(c) and 1114. The grand jury also charged him with six counts of perpetrating a hoax regarding a lethal pathogen in violati...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. (“Oppenheimer”) brings this action against Trans Energy Inc. (“Trans Energy”) and its wholly — owned subsidiary, American Shale Development Inc. (“American Shale”), alleging two claims for breach of contract. Specifically, Oppenheimer alleges that Defendants failed to properly compensate Oppenheimer pursuant to the terms of an agreement (the “A...
Views: 1
Page 73978
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (D.E. 87)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. 87, 3/29/13). Plaintiff Margarita Tello filed a Response in Opposition (D.E. 108, 4/19/13), and Defendant filed a Reply in Support (D.E. 118, 4/29/13). Having considered the referenced filings, related pleadings, and recor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiff Wilfredo Reyes brings this action alleging defendant Krasdale Foods, Inc. (“Krasdale”), his former employer, discriminated against him based on disability, and retaliated against him, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. Plaintiff also alleges Krasdale and defendant Bernard Patton, Krasdale’s Director of Hum...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court are motions in two cases pending before this Court. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) moves to consolidate Civil Action Nos. 10-1196 and 10-1996 and to set a briefing schedule. See Royer v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, Civil No. 10-1196, ECF No. 76; Royer v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, Civil No. 10-1996, ECF No. 107. BOP also moves to stay discovery in Civil Case No...
Views: 0
Page 74109
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
James F.H. Scott, appearing pro se, brought suit in this Court against Kelli D. Bender alleging malicious prosecution (Count I); false imprisonment (Count II); a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Count HI); and breach of contract (Count IV). (R. 6, Am. Compl.) On September 26, 2012, the Court dismissed Scott’s complaint for lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs filed suit in February 2012 seeking judicial review of the United States Forest Service’s Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) authorizing implementation of the Fleecer Mountains Project (“Project”) on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest (“the Forest”). Plaintiffs also challenge the Record of Decision and corresponding documents authorizing the implem...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
On April 21, 2011, Bill Watson, the elected Sheriff in Portsmouth, Virginia (“Sheriff Watson”), ordered his deputies to conduct strip searches of all civilian contractors that entered the Portsmouth City Jail (the “Jail”) the following day. Sheriff Watson issued such blanket order based on information he had received indicating that contractors were bringing contraband into th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
This case is before the magistrate judge by consent. Plaintiff, Walter Blaylock (“Blaylock”), challenges the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Blaylock’s application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 423 and 1381(a). This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Document No. 18)
Audrey P. Dyjak (“Plaintiff’) brought this age discrimination action in state court asserting claims against Baystate Health Systems, Inc. (“Defendant”) pursuant to both MASS. GEN. LAWS ch. 151 B (Count I) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 (Count II). On February 9,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Document Nos. 81 and 88)
Steven Opalenik and Diane Opalenik (“Plaintiffs”), proceeding pro se, assert various civil rights and tort claims against the Town of Hadley and certain Hadley police officers (“Hadley Defendants”) as well as against the Town of South Hadley and certain South Hadley- police officers (“South Ha...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On March 28, 2013, this Court issued the second part of its ruling on the parties’ motions for summary judgment.1 The March 28 Opinion noted that plaintiffs had offered “[a] sample of decline to prosecute forms [‘DP forms’] from various District Attorney’s offices” in support of “the conclusion that the City has a persistent and widespread practice of performing ...
Views: 0
Page 74192
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO ALL INDIRECT-PURCHASER PLAINTIFF CASES ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are defendants’1 motions to dismiss indirect-purchaser plaintiffs’ state law claims.2 For the following reasons, defendants’ motions are granted in part and denied in part.
I. Background
This is an antitrust case that direct-purchaser plaintiffs (DPPs) and indirect-purchaser plaintiffs (IPPs) file...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On January 28, 2013, the plaintiff Paul Marisco (“the Plaintiff’ or “Marisco”) filed an amended complaint against the Defendant NCO Financial Systems, Inc. (“the Defendant” or “NCO”), a debt collection agency, alleging a violation of the Plaintiffs privacy rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) et seq. (“FDCPA”). Presently pend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (#13) I. Introduction On December 9, 2011, plaintiffs Dr. Thomas Hardiman (“Hardiman”) and Affil*249iated Foot Care, PC (“AFC”) filed a three-count complaint (# 1) against the United States and Martin Flynn in his individual and official capacity. On June 28, 2012, Hardiman and AFC voluntarily dismissed Martin Flynn as a defendant in the ca...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant Intuit Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Count II of Plaintiffs Complaint and to Strike Portions of Count III (Doc. No. 57).
I. Background
This case involves two television advertisements for TurboTax software. These advertisements are known as “Master Plumber” and “Return Expert.” See Complaint, Doc. No. 1, ¶ 26. At issue with the pending motion is plaintiffs’ ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This dispute arises from millions of dollars that Plaintiff John Joseph Waters, Jr. obtained from his longtime employer, Defendant Gerard Leon Cafesjian. Waters commenced this action asserting that the money he received was only part of his agreed compensation and that Cafesjian still owes him millions more; Cafesjian, on the other hand, alleges that Wate...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In this insurance action, Plaintiff Robin Bergen d/b/a R & D Enterprises (“Bergen”) alleges that his former insurer, Defendant Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company (“Grinnell”), must defend and indemnify him against claims brought by a third-party in Minnesota state court. Bergen now moves for partial summary judg*868ment on the duty to defend, and Grinnel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This action arises out of Minnesota State Project No. 8214-114 (the “Project”) for the design and construction of the “approach” (described in more detail below) to the future bridge connecting Oak Park Heights, Minnesota, to St. Joseph, Wiscon*853sin, over the St. Croix River.1 Plaintiff C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. (“McCrossan”) submitted a proposa...
Views: 2
ORDER
(Motion For Protective Order #343, Motion to Compel # 345, Motion to Compel Discovery Responses/Unredacted Documents # 360, and Motion for Partial Withdraw # 419)
Before the Court is the Federal Trade Commission’s (hereinafter “FTC”) Motion For Protective Order. (#343). Defendant AMG Services, Inc. (hereinafter “AMG”) filed an Opposition (#347), and the FTC filed a Reply (# 364).
Also befor...
Views: 1
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Courtney’s Motion to Preserve Right to Jury Trial, filed March 29, 2012 (Doc. 31)(“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on February 8, 2013. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court should permit Defendant Keith Michael Courtney to inform the jury of the United States Sentencing Guidelines’ advisory sent...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Does a homeowners insurance policy’s exclusion from coverage apply? That is the question in this declaratory judgment case. For the reasons that follow, the question is answered in the affirmative. I A Since 1997, Defendant Kelly McClintic has operated a day care business from her home, located at 520 E. Summit St. in Breckenridge,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (doc. 51), filed on December 7, 2012 by Plaintiff Maetta Green, and a Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 57), filed on December 17, 2012 by Defendants Medco Health Solutions of Texas, LLC (“Medco LLC”), Medco Health Solutions, Inc. (“Medco Inc.”), and Aon Hewitt Absence Management, LLC, f/k/a Disability Manag...
Views: 2
Page 74307
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Currently before the Court are Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for injunctive relief pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. The Court held a hearing with respect to these motions on May 15, 2013. At the conclusion of that hearing, the Cou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs IzatuIIo Khoshmukhamedov and Zoulfia Issaeva filed this case against State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm) on March 15th, 2012, based on State Farm’s refusal to pay Plaintiffs under a homeowner’s insurance policy for losses sustained when water pipes burst and Plaintiffs’ home was flooded. Pending *444before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. MEMORANDUM
This is a qui tam action under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(A), (B). August W. Arnold brings this action on behalf of the U.S. Department of Transportation, alleging that CMC Engineering misrepresented the credentials of its consultants to obtain higher pay rates for work performed on state projects that were paid for with federal funds...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
I. SYNOPSIS
Pending before the Court is Defendants Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (“Nationstar”) and Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae,” collectively with Na-tionstar, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss For Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Failure to State a Claim Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (Doc. No. 3)...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. *656(Doc. 58). The parties have filed briefs and evidentiary materials in support of their respective positions, (Docs. 52, 59, 67, 68, 73, 74),1 and the motion is ripe for resolution. After careful consideration, the Court concludes that the motion is due to be denied.
BACKGROUND
According to the complaint, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on the HCA Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 98).1 The Court heard oral arguments on that Motion on April 15, 2013. Having considered those arguments, as well as the arguments raised in the briefing which has been submitted (Docket Nos. 99, 108 & 109), the Court will partially grant the motion, and deny Plaintiffs’ request to amend.
I. BACKGROU...
Views: 0
ORDER
Tom Powers and his wife Mary Powers bring this suit against Health Care Service Corporation (HCSC), Medical Review Institute of America, Inc. (MRI), and Woodward, Inc. MRI and Woodward have filed motions to dismiss the claims against them [document # 22, 24], and HCSC has filed a partial motion to dismiss some of the claims against it [# 23]. Because the motions to dismiss present several c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS IN LIMINE
This case arises out of a surgery performed on Elliot Kaplan (“Kaplan”) by a surgeon at Mayo Clinic to treat pancreatic cancer, a condition which post-surgery testing revealed that Kaplan never had. Kaplan and has wife Jeanne Kaplan (collectively, “the Kaplans”) filed lawsuit against Mayo Clinic and its affiliated entities (collectivel...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Vito Congine, Jr., filed this civil rights action against the Village of Crivitz and Marinette County District Attorney Allen Brey pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Congine alleges that his rights were violated when the Village police chief, after seeking Brey’s advice, ente...
Views: 0
*1371OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff brings this lawsuit to correct the inventorship of five issued patents related to gene silencing. For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 18) is GRANTED IN PART AND DEFERRED IN PART, Plaintiffs Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery (Dkt. 30) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AND STAYED, and Plaintiffs request for a Rule 16 conference (D...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
K.F. Jacoben & Co., (“Jacobsen”) filed this action against its former employee, Ryan Gaylor (“Gaylor”), seeking damages resulting from Gaylor’s taking, retaining, and disclosing numerous confidential documents from Jacobsen, and an injunction preventing Gaylor from engaging in such conduct in the future. Gaylor initially moved to dismiss all five claims asserted b...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALAN GROSS and JUDITH GROSS,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1860 (JEB)
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES, INC.
and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on four motions for summary judgment which together reach all remaining issues in this case. The Court considered all motions, briefing, and related documents, and orders as follows:
1. Hartford’s motion for summary judgment regarding reformation (Dkt. No. 79) is DENIED;
2. Hartford’s motion...
Views: 0
*273
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is Defendants Bay Shore Union Free School District (the “District”), Peter J. Dion (“Dion”), Evelyn Bloise Holman (“Holman”), -and Robert Pashken’s (“Pashken” and collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint. Aso pending before the Court is Plaintiff Charles W. Jones’ (“Plaintiff’) cross-motion to amend. For the f...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Campbell Soup Co.’s (“Defendant” or “Campbell”)’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [DE 29]. The Court has carefully considered the Motion, Plaintiff Mark Krzykwa (“Plaintiff’ or “Krzykwa”)’s Response [DE 32], Defendant’s Reply [DE 34], arguments by counsel at the May 10, 2013 hearing, and is othe...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________________________
JOHN MINNICK,
Plaintiff,
v. 1:10-CV-2109
(FJS)
KATRINA CARLILE,
Defendant.
_____...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Presently before the Court is Defendant Papa John’s USA, Inc.’s (“Papa John’s”) motion for summary judgment. (MSJ, ECF No. 27.) Also before the Court are the parties’ respective oppositions and replies. (Opp. to MSJ, ECF No. 42; Rep. in Supp., ECF No. 48.) Both parties have also filed numerous exhibits and requests for judicial notice. (ECF Nos. 27-2, 30, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ODILLA MUTAKA MWANI, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 99-125 (JMF)
USAMA BIN LADEN and AL QAEDA,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before me fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ [sic] Motion to Remand, filed July 13, 2012 (Doc. 12)(“Motion to Remand”). The Court held a hearing on November 21, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether Defendant James Reese waived his right to removal by filing a motion to dismiss in state court; (ii) whether effective removal requires an affirmative explanation...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ROBERT M. MCDEVITT,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1297 (GK)
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Robert M. McDev...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff William Mark Scott, a shareholder of Enterprise Financial Services Corp. (“EFSC”), brings this putative class action against EFSC, its Chief Executive Officer, Peter F. Benoist, and its Chief Financial Officer, Frank H. Sanfilippo, (collectively “Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges violations of §§ 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, arising from D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This Fair Labor Standards Act case presents the court with a dilemma: enforce arbitration agreements against Defendant Citi Trends Store Managers, who are potential opt-in Plaintiffs in this collective action that were obtained during the conditional certification stage of this case *1290and gut the collective action mechanism Congress provided for the protection of employees ...
Views: 0
Page 74913
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Karl B. Manuel, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil complaint against Sergeant Sharon Mears (“Sergeant Mears”) and corrections officer Lauro B. Diaz, Jr. (“officer Diaz”) (collectively, “defendants”) 1 on March 29, 2012, alleging excessive force claims in violation of his Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights. (D.I. 3) The court gran...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
MARK STEVEN CORRINET, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 75092
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On July 13, 2010, James Sours was arrested and booked into the Big Sandy Regional Detention Center. R. 52-1. Two days later Sours was dead. R. 52-14. The tragic events that led to Sours’s death are the subject of this case, instituted by plaintiff William Sours as the administrator of his brother’s estate. The plaintiff believes that the defendants violated Sours’s rig...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This cause is before the court1 on a motion to dismiss filed on June 22, 2012, by the defendants, Madison City Board of Education and Dr. Dee Fowler, the Board’s superintendent, (collectively referred to as “the Board”). They assert that the complaint must be dismissed as to all claims against them for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Doc. 17). After various extensions o...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation was filed April 30, 2013. (Doc. 39.) After de novo review and absent objection, the Report and Recommendation is AFFIRMED, APPROVED and ADOPTED. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Defendants Andrew Pallito, Greg Hale and Shana’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 29) is GRANTED.
The Vermont Attorney General’s Office is ORDERED to release forthwith to Plaintif...
Views: 1
Page 75277
ORDER
Plaintiffs Louis Jerry Edwards and Tom Tvedten, physicians who provide abortion services at Little Rock Family Planning Services, Inc., bring this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against members of the Arkansas State Medical Board (the “Board”), sued in their official capacities. Plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of Arkansas Act 301 of the 2013 Regular Session of the 89th General A...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Nadgia Dixon brings this action on her own behalf and on behalf of a *393putative class of employees of defendants NBCUniversal Media, LLC (“NBCU”) and Oxygen Media, LLC (“Oxygen”), alleging that defendants failed to compensate her for overtime wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., and New York Labor Law (“NYLL”), §§ 19...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER On May 18, 2012, defendant Stephanie Lloyd (“Lloyd”) was convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery, robbery, and brandishing of a firearm during a crime of violence. Presently before the Court are motions by Lloyd for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Rule 29(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (“Fed. R. Crim. P.”) and for a new trial pursuant to Fed R....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On August 27, 2012, the Plaintiff Barbara Friel (the “Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the Defendants County of Nassau (the “County”) and Nassau County Police Department (the “Police Department,” and collectively, the “Defendants”) pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, the United State...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiffs, Michael Sher and Paula Sher, bring this purported class action asserting several causes of action against the defendant, Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”). The plaintiffs’ claims arise out of Allstate’s alleged practice of requiring that insured property owners replace or complete repairs of damaged property within 180 days of receipt of an actual cash va...
Views: 0
*291MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On July 13, 2012, the plaintiff Dr. Maria-Lucia Anghel filed this action against various New York State entities, senior state officials, and United HealthCare. The complaint asserts numerous causes of action, including violations of due process and equal protection, fraud, and conversion. Presently pending before the Court are three motions: (1) a motion by t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Presently before the Court are two motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ *1014motion for summary judgment on then-causes of action for: 1) unlawful detention; 2) arrest without probable cause; 3) battery on Plaintiff Robinson; 4) negligence; and 5) violation o...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING HALLIBURTON’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT After a handrail on a piece of Halliburton Energy Services’s equipment collapsed on and pinned Dennis Sabe, Kevin Cales managed to lift it off but tore some cartilage in his ribs and slipped a disc in his back in the process. Seeking to recover for those injuries, Kevin and Ann Cales brought negligence and loss-of-consortium claim...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the motion for summary judgment of defendant Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority, (“PRHTA”), (Docket Nos. 604 & 605); and the motion for summary judgment of defendants Jose M. Izquierdo, Fernando Fagundo, and Jose F. Lluch (collectively, “individual defendants”), (Docket Nos. 602 & 603). Having considered defendants’ motions; the oppositions by p...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Araya Henok brings this action against Chase Home Finance, LLC (“Chase”) and Fannie Mae,1 challenging the legality of the foreclosure on a property he owned on 16th Street N.E. in Washington, D.C. (“the property”). Henok moves for partial summary judgment against Chase on his claim under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RES-PA”), 12 U.S.C...
Views: 0
FINAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER There may have been some question in this class action lawsuit about the need for a final hearing on May 8, 2013, given the parties’ agreement that the case had run its course and should be dismissed. But as in our personal lives — with births, significant events and deaths — this case too deserved a rite of passage, to mark the *227occasion, explore lessons learned, a...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PETER GEORGE ODHIAMBO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MARSHALL C. DANIELS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civi...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
MARCUS L. MCDANIEL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-723 (RWR)
)
TOM J. VIL...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Currently before the court is Brian I. Cammile’s (“petitioner”) application for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 1) For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss petitioner’s § 2254 application as time-barred by the one-year period of limitations prescribed in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1).
II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In December 19...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Currently before the court is Keith Hoffman’s (“petitioner”) application for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 5) For the reasons that follow, the court will deny petitioner’s § 2254 application.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On January 17, 2009, petitioner crashed his vehicle at the intersection of Seashore Highway and Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 28, 2011, plaintiffs Rey-bold Venture Group XI-A LLC, Reybold Venture Group XI-B LLC, Reybold Venture Group XI-C LLC, Reybold Venture Group XI-D LLC, Reybold Venture Group XI-E LLC, and Reybold Venture Group XI-F LLC (collectively, “plaintiffs”) filed a complaint alleging that the Voluntary School Assessment Act (‘VSA”), 9 Del. C. § 2661, is discrimi...
Views: 0
OPINION
On July 16, 2003, Plaintiff Artemi Ltd. initiated this patent infringement action against Defendant Safe-Strap Co., Inc. Several months later, upon the parties’ consent, the Court stayed the case pending the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) decision on reexamination and reissue of the patent at issue. The USPTO issued its decision on July 26, 2011. Almost a year and a...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No'. 13], filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Defendants Independent School District No. 89 of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, a/k/a Oklahoma City Public Schools (the “District”) and DeAnn Davis (“Davis”) seek a partial dismissal of the Amended Complaint, as discussed further below. Plaintiff has timely opposed the M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. INTRODUCTION The plaintiff, Gregory T. Brown, Jr., (“Brown”), was formerly incarcerated at the Essex County Corrections Facility (“ECCF”) in Middleton, Massachusetts. He claims that' on March 24, 2010, while he was housed in the special management unit at ECCF, he was viciously attacked and beaten by his cellmate, Nat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
The plaintiffs are developers who wish to build an electric power generating facility on land they own in Brockton, Massachusetts (“the City”). They have sued the City, its planning board and city council, and seven of its present and former officials, alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law based on a “con-spir[aey] to system...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (COUNTS TWO AND THREE), AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ CROSS-MOTION TO AMEND COUNTERCLAIM
(Doc. 17, 32)
Pending before the court are two related motions: a motion for judgment on the *415pleadings for Counts Two and Three of the Verified Counterclaim, filed by Plaintiff Ch...
Views: 1
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS AND OTHER POST-TRIAL MOTIONS
BEFORE THE COURT are the following motions: (1) Plaintiffs Motion for Attorney’s Fees, Expert Fees and Other Costs (ECF No. 200); (2) Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of Defense Counsel’s Billing Records (ECF No. 231); (3) Plaintiffs Motion for New Trial (ECF No. 225); and (4) Defendants’ Motion to Amend...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RONNIE L. HARRIS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. 12-1215 (ABJ)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This civil rights case, brought by Plaintiff El’Reko D’Wyane Randle pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against a number of prison officials, arises from serious allegations of abuse and neglect within the prison system. Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Third Amended Verified Complaint (“TAC”) pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), 12(b)(3), a...
Views: 0
ORDER RE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This action was initiated in May 2012 by the Native Village of Chickaloon, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Center for Water Advocacy and challenges the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (“NMFS”) issuance of an “Incidental Harassment Authorization” that allowed Apache Alaska Corporation to conduct *1037sei...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION Following District Judge Barbara Jones’s dismissal of a related matter {“Fried /”), Plaintiffs filed this action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, pleading various federal and state law claims against Defendants arising from failed investments with Defendant Lehman Brothers Real Estate Associates III.1 On *709June 17, 2011, Defendants removed the lawsuit to this Co...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an action in tort. Plaintiff Reginella Construction Company (“Reginella”) asserts claims of breach of fiduciary duty, intentional interference with contractual relations, and tortious bad faith against defendant Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America (“Travelers”) in connection with surety bonds issued for two multi-million dollar construction projects. [ECF No. 1.] Re...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Deborah Malin filed this action against defendants Hospira, Inc., Deborah Rodriguez, Jay Anderson, and Michael Carlin, asserting claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), *87829 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (“Title VII”).1 Presently before the court is defendants’ motion for summary ju...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
J.C. Trading initiated this action in Missouri state court on October 1, 2010, alleging nine causes of action relating to the breach of three purported oral agreements. Walmart removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on March 4, 2011. (D.I. 1). On May 12, 2011, Eastern District of Missouri Judge Catherine D. Perry transferred the case ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is once again before the Court on Plaintiff Pamela McKinney’s (“McKinney”) Motion for Class Certification. (Dkt. No. 38). In a prior Memorandum Opinion, the Court found that McKinney satisfied all of the factors under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), as well as the “predominance” prong of Rule 23(b)(3). See McKinney v. U.S. Postal Serv., No. 11-cv-631 (RLW),...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Now before the Court are the following motions: Defendant Jason Miltenberger’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Dkt. # 14); Defendant Jason Miltenberger’s Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue, or, in the Alternative, Motion to Transfer and Brief in Support (Dkt. ## 15, 17); Defendant Jason Miltenber-ger’s Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Proces...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Terry Burke, personal representative of the estate of Berniece Hermsen and in his capacity as previous attorney in fact for Hermsen, brought this claim against defendants alleging breach of contract, bad faith, fraud, and misrepresentation stemming from the scope of coverage of Hermsen’s long-term care insurance policy. Docket 31. Burke moves to compel prod...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants Dominick Mazza (“Mazza”) and Mazza & Sons, Inc. (“M & S”) (collectively “Mazza defendants”) move for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 33 (“Rule _”). Defendant Cross Nicastro (“Ni-castro”) joined the Mazza defendants’ motion. The United States of America (“the government”) filed a consolidated respon...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
In this action, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) brings counterclaims for breach of contract against Nikki Pennington, and in rem mortgage foreclosure against both Nikki and Jeffrey Pennington. The Penningtons then filed counterclaims to Wells Fargo’s counterclaims. Currently before me is Wells Fargo’s motion to strike, or in the alternative, dismiss the Penningtons’ counterclaim...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Ken Levin, a literary agent, brought this suit in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, against his former client, author Alex Grecian. Count I of the complaint *1117seeks a declaratory judgment that Levin’s and Grecian’s representation agreement (“Agreement”) is a valid and enforceable contract and that Grecian owes Levin 15 percent of the money that Grecian ...
Views: 0
RULING RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 39) and PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE A SUR-REPLY BRIEF (Doc. No. 55)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Cesidio Palmieri brings this action against the defendant, the City of Hartford, in connection with the termination of Palmieri’s employment as a Hartford police officer. Palmieri brings five causes of action: disability discrim...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
JOHN A. CHAMPION, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 76692
ORDER
This is one of a series of cases brought on behalf of DH, a multi-handicapped child (now fourteen years of age) in which her parents, suing pro se,1 assert that defendant Board of Education of the City of Toledo Public Schools (TPS) has since 2006 deprived their daughter of the free and appropriate education (FAPE) to which she is entitled under the Individuals With Disabilities Education A...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the. Court is a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) (together, “Defendants”).1 Plaintiff, Malik Rahim (“Plaintiff’), opposes the motion.2. For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED in all respects.3
Background
Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana on August ...
Views: 0
*83MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendants Essilor Industries and Francois Deterre’s motion to strike an expert witness. (Docket No. 65.) Having reviewed defendants’ motion, plaintiff Sobeida Irizarry-Santiago’s response in opposition, (Docket No. 70), defendants’ reply, (Docket No. 73), and plaintiffs sur-reply, (Docket No. 78), the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion and excludes plaint...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Camille Velez-Rive. (Docket No. 77.) The magistrate judge recommends that defendant Ernesto Morales-Castro’s (“Morales”) motion to suppress, (Docket No. 26), be denied. (Docket No. 77 at p. 24.) After an independent review of the record and defendant Morales’ objections to the R & R, (Docket Nos...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for review in this employment retaliation case is the motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment filed by Defendants Prince George’s County, Maryland (“the County”); Rushern Baker; and Pamela B. Creekmur. (ECF No. 17). The issues have been fully briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing being deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the motion of defendant Laborers’ Local Union No. 894 (“Local 894”) for summary judgment (Doc. No. 34), plaintiffs, Michael and Cynthia Drake, have filed a response (Doc. No. 41), and Local 894 has replied (Doc. No. 42). For the reasons that follow, Local 894’s motion is granted, in part, and this matter is remanded to state court.
I. Background
This case ar...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
We must decide whether an inmate’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint presents claims that this court can exercise jurisdiction over.
I.
Background
Moisés Castillo-González, an inmate in a Puerto Rican correctional institution, filed a pro-se complaint seeking compensatory damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and *178the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Castillo-G...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Kharyn Ramsay brings this class action lawsuit against Defendants Sawyer Property Management of Maryland LLC and Jeffrey Tapper, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq., the Maryland Consumer Debt Collection Act (“MCDCA”), Md.Code Ann., Com. Law, §§ 14-201 et seq., and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (“...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a lawsuit brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by plaintiffs Sandra Ladik, Penny Perkins, Jackie Goebel, Marie Coggins and Sondra Steeb-Lamb, who are current or former employees of defendant Wal-mart Stores, Inc. Each plaintiff would have been a class member in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, — U.S. —, 131 S.Ct. 2541,180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011), a case invo...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff MONIQUE L. WILLIAMS’ Motion to Dismiss First Amended Counterclaim or, Alternatively, to Strike. [D.E. 51].
THE COURT has considered the motion and the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Monique L. Williams (“Plaintiff’ or “Williams”), alleges that on or about December, 2...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
For the following reasons, the Court hereby DISMISSES Plaintiffs’ Complaint in its entirety with partial leave to amend, as set out in detail below.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Joe Dettling and Robert Cabos filed their original complaint in this action on June 14, 2011. (Doc. No. 1.) On August 9, 2012, they filed the First Amended Complaint, t...
Views: 0
Page 77191
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT KAISER’S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE 12(b)(6), DENYING DEFENDANT KAISER’S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE (12)(b)(7), AND ORDER RE RULE 19 JOINDER
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This case arises from a dispute over a health maintenance organization’s ability to take discounts on services provided by a hospital. On October 19, 2012, Plaintiff The Queen...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF GENERAL ELECTRIC
*?
Table of Contents
I. Background............................................................586
II. Policy Underlying The Inequitable Conduct Doctrine........................588
III. Standard for Finding Inequitable Conduct .................................590
IV. Summary of the Court’s Findings......................
Views: 0
ORDER Re: Plaintiffs Motion to Remand Removed Action [9]
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff Emmanuel Onelum’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion to Remand Removed Action [9]. The Court having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to this Motion and having considered all arguments presented to the Court, NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS:
The Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion. This action is remanded t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, TO EXCLUDE PLAINTIFF’S CAUSATION EXPERTS, AND TO STRIKE AFFIDAVIT1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................982
A. Factual Background.................................................982
B. Procedural Background..............................................983
II. LE...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. [Docket No. 13] The Court heard oral argument is on May 3, 2013. For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendant’s motion.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
1. The Parties
Defendant Mental Health Resources, Inc. (“MHR”) is a private non-profit corporation that provides ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint [Docket No. 18], Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Responsive Memorandum as Untimely [Docket No. 30], and Plaintiffs Motion for Continuance [Docket No. 34]. The Court heard oral argument on March 15, 2013.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
1. The P...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SKY ANGEL U.S., LLC, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 12-1834 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal Action No. 12-211 (JDB)
JON C. COOPER,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is [37] defendant Jon Cooper's motion to reconsider the C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF STATE PRISONER’S HABEAS PETITION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................959
A. Factual Background.................................................959
B. Procedural Background..............................................960
1. State proceedings.........
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a securities fraud ease in which plaintiffs,1 Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund (P & P) and West Virginia Laborers Pension Trust Fund (WVL), claim defendants, Michael Burns and Robert Richter, made false or misleading disclosures in financial statements related to Dana Corporation (Dana) securities and bonds.
Pending is plaintiffs’ motion for class certification (Doc. 166...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendants Armand Devezin, Rosalynne Dennis, Darryl Kil-bert, and Charlotte Matthew’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion for Dismissal,1 *663wherein Defendants seek the dismissal of Plaintiff Joy Walker Slocum’s (“Plaintiff’) claims with prejudice. After considering the complaint, the pending motion, the memorandum in support, the opposition, the reply, th...
Views: 0
Page 77559
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiffs amended complaint. For the reasons that follow, the motion is DENIED.
Background
The malicious prosecution lawsuit before this Court arises from highly public earlier litigation in which Jefferson Parish sued Waste Management in an effort to early terminate the parties’ Landfill Contract, so that Je...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77577: Oklahoma Police Pension & Retirement System v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n
Page 77577
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is part of the fallout from the residential mortgage crisis. The plaintiff, Oklahoma Police Pension and Retirement System, brings this putative class action against the defendant, U.S. Bank National Association (“U.S. Bank”), the trustee for fourteen trusts in which the plaintiff and the other members of the putative class invested (the “Covered Trusts”). The trusts ...
Views: 0
Page 77583
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(June 3, 2013)
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Dkt. No. 192) filed by Defendant Government of the Virgin Islands (the “Government”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). Plaintiffs Joseph Thomas and Ingrid Thomas-Jackson oppose the Motion. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the Motion and dismiss t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises from the latest chapter in an ongoing dispute between health insurers and branded drug manufacturers. *342Insurers are keen to control drug costs, while manufacturers are determined to maintain market share while competing with generics and therapeutic alternatives. In recent years, manufacturers have launched programs through which they offer to cover the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER At issue is whether an Emergency Rule promulgated by the Secretary of Commerce shortening the red snapper fishing season in federal waters off the coasts of certain Gulf states was unlawful under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Secretary promulgated the Rule following the recommendation of the Gulf Council of the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”), a special coun...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (#16) AND MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (# 21)
I. Background and Facts
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (“SNAP”) provides a system that gives participants financial assistance to buy necessary food items from authorized stores. The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (“WIC”),...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiffs commenced the within action alleging that the Defendants unilaterally increased the percentage of contributions that employees represented by the Plaintiffs, New York State public-employee unions, were required to pay for health insurance benefits and thereby violated the Contracts Clause and Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This Order addresses Defendants The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York, as Trustee for the Certifi-cateholders CWABS, Inc., Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-19 (“BNYM”) and Bank of America, N.A.’s (“Bank of America” and, collectively with BNYM, the “Banks”) motion to enforce the parties’ settlement agreement [Doe. 17]. The Court grants the motion.
I. The Parties’ Dis...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are the following motions:
1) Clearline Technologies, Ltd.’s (“Clearline” or “Plaintiff’) Motion for Pleading Amendment (Doc. No. 159);
2) Cooper B-Line Inc.’s (“Cooper”) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (“JMOL”) (Doc. No. 161);
3) Clearline’s Renewed Motion for JMOL (Doc. No. 160);
4) Clearline’s Motion for Enhanced Damages (Doc. No. ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Safka Holdings LLC (“Plaintiff’) brings this action alleging that iPlay, Inc. (“Defendant” or “iPlay”) breached an agreement (the “License Agreement”) whereby Defendant was to license the use of its trademarks to Plaintiff in exchange for payments of royalties and commissions. In its First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), Plaintiff asserts causes of action for (1) breach of contr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM, ORDER, AND JUDGMENT
Petitioner is confined in a state prison following his conviction of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
He argues that his conviction was constitutionally tainted because the trial court improperly rejected a peremptory challenge asserted by his counsel on the ground that it was impermissibly discriminatory on the ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the Government’s motion, filed pursuant to Supplemental Rule G(8)(c), F.R.Civ.P., to compel the Claimant Norma Fouche to comply with Rule G(5)(a) by filing a more detailed statement of her claim to the defendant property, or in the alternative, to strike her claim for failure to comply with the Rule. The Claimant has not filed a response to the Government’s motion. For t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The one count Indictment charges defendant Lenny Fernando Soto-Mateo (“defendant”) with Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
I. Background
In January, 2007, an individual claiming to be Carlos Manuel Ramos-Trinidad applied for a United States Passport. The application was rejected. After an investigation, the applicant was identified as defendan...
Views: 0
ORDER (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL, INC. AND WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.; AND (4) DENYING REQUEST FOR RULE 54(B) CERTIFICATION
I. INTRODUCTION
This is the latest installment in this protra...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on motions to dismiss filed by two sets of Defendants that raise nearly identical issues (DE 67, DE 73). This is an action for fraud, breach of contract, and alleged violations of state securities laws, which was initially filed in state court on May 18, 2010 but was subsequently removed to federal court. For the following reasons, Defendants’ motions are g...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is pending for consideration of Defendant/Movant Lazelle Maxwell’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. [Record No. 244] Consistent with local practice, the motion was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Robert E. Wier for consideration under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Wier filed a Recomme...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file an amended consolidated complaint and to amend the judgment pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 59(e). Plaintiffs have also appealed the judgment, which was entered on August 13, 2012. Since plaintiffs have not satisfied the requirements of Rule 59(e), and the proposed amendments do ...
Views: 1
Page 78043
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file an amended consolidated complaint and to amend the judgment pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 59(e). Plaintiffs have also appealed the judgment, which was entered on August 13, 2012. Since plaintiffs have not satisfied the requirements of Rule 59(e), and the proposed amendments do ...
Views: 0
Page 78048
ORDER This matter is before the court’s sua sponte reconsideration of its prior order denying the plaintiffs motion to remand [Doc. No. 22]. I. Factual and Procedural Background This case arises from the sinking of a sailing vessel near Great Abacos, Bahamas, on or about November 13, 2010. The plaintiffs decedent, Laura Zekoll, disappeared during the incident and is presumed dead. At the time of...
Views: 0
Page 78069
ORDER
The issue presented in this case is whether an injunction, entered some 33 years ago, which permanently enjoins the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) “from disclosing any list of annual Medicare reimbursements amounts, for any years” that identifies providers of services under Medicare, should be vacated or modified because continued prospective application “is...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On May 9, 2013, 2013 WL 2090187, this Court culminated its inquiry into the question whether the Petition for Writ of Ha-beas Corpus (“Petition”) filed by pro se plaintiff Gilberto Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”) was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) (“Section 2244(d)”) by reconfirming (1) its negative answer to that question and (2) Gonzalez’ right under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING FURTHER PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
I. INTRODUCTION
In this First Amendment case, Plaintiff Blaine Coleman challenges the bus advertising policy of Defendant Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA) and the rejection, under that policy, of his proposed ad, which is critical of Israel. He filed a motion for a preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order ...
Views: 0
*1378
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND (D.E. 13)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (D.E. 13), filed on February 8, 2013. Defendant filed its response in opposition (D.E. 18) on February 22, 2013, to which Plaintiff filed its Reply (D.E. 23) on March 1, 2013. Having reviewed the Motion, Response, Reply, and the record, the Court finds as follows.
I. Backgro...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION On November 9, 2012, plaintiff FastVDO LLC. (“FastVDO”) filed a complaint against defendant Paramount Pictures Corporation (“Paramount”) alleging infringement of its U.S. Patent No. RE40,-081 (“the '081 patent”). (D.I. 1) Presently before the court is Paramount’s motion to transfer this action to the Central District of California. (D.I. 9) The court has jurisdic...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff James Carlini initiated this action on November 26, 2012, by filing a Complaint against Jennifer Velez in her capacity as Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Human Services, and Valerie Harr in her capacity as the Director of the Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services. The Complaint alleges that Defendants violated *484Plaintiffs rights under 42 U.S.C. § 198...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Shana Perry, Daryl Quiney, and Damon Harper brought suit against *782their former employer, Defendant Auto-Zoners, LLC1 (“Autozone”), for a number of alleged injuries arising from the interaction between Plaintiffs and their supervisors. Perry brought five counts individually, and Quiney and Harper together brought two counts. Autozone has filed two motions...
Views: 0
Page 78244
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the following:
1. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. 179), filed April 11, 2012;
*13162. Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. 181), filed April 25, 2012;
3. Defendant’s Reply in Support of Its Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 187), filed May 9, 2012;
4. Report and Recommendation (Doc. 194), file...
Views: 0
*1259ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
This matter is before the Court on the Application of Petitioner Erick Rogelio Nieto Baquera (“Mr. Nieto”) for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed March 1, 2013. (ECF No. 1.) A hearing was held on Mr. Nieto’s Application on May 23, 2013. Mr. Nieto is a lawful permanent resident (“LPR”) of the United States who was arrested and detained in 2013 by i...
Views: 0
*133MEMORANDUM, ORDER, & JUDGMENT
Table of Contents
I. Introduction...................... ......................................133
II. Facts and Procedural History....... ......................................133
III. Law............................. ......................................135
IV. Application of Law to Facts ........ ......................................135
a. Negligence and Stri...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction [DE 5] (“Motion”).1 The Court has carefully considered the Motion, Defendant Seminole Tribe’s' Response [DE 12] (“Seminole Tribe Response”), Defendant Michael Satz’s Response [DE 13] (“Sate Response”), Plaintiffs’ Reply [DE 19] (“Reply”), the argument of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brings this action against defendants Thomas C. Conradt, David J. Weishaus, and Trent Martin for insider trading in violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5. In its Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), the SEC alleges t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
Before the Court is the motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b)(1) (“Rule 12(b)(1)”) filed by defendant Candido Gutierrez-Guzman d/b/a General Distribution. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS defendant’s motion and dismisses this case, without prejudice.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
In its complaint, plaintiff Indufrial ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER FOR REMAND
Upset with the Wisconsin Department of Health Services’ interpretation of federal *923regulations governing its long-term residential care facility, Outagamie County filed this action for declaratory relief in the Circuit Court for Outagamie County. The County seeks a declaration that the Department’s interpretation of various Medicare-related regulations governing f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a suit alleging a failure to pay the overtime required under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. Christian Vallejo sued his former employer, Garda CL Southwest, Inc. (Garda), asserting a right to relief for himself and on behalf of other similarly situated employees. Garda moved to dismiss or stay and compel arbitration under an arbitr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Sergeant Stephen Kelly and Officers Michael MeAuliffe and Thomas Dekoker (collectively, “Defendants”) move to vacate a jury verdict and judgment in favor of Plaintiff Sean Thomas (“Thomas” or “Plaintiff’). Additionally, they seek dismissal with prejudice of Thomas’s complaint or, in the alternative, a new trial. For the reasons discussed below, Defendants’ motion to va...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR A FURTHER ENFORCEMENT ORDER AND DENYING MOTION TO HOLD DEFENDANTS IN.CONTEMPT OF COURT (Docket No. 2236)
Plaintiffs move to enforce, and hold Defendants in contempt for violating, the Court’s prior orders, on the' basis that Defendants have consistently failed to provide sign language interpreters (SLIs) during education and vocational programs at the Substance Abuse Tre...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
EDITH M. BUDIK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action Nos.
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Presently before the Court is Defendants GMAC Mortgage, LLC (“GMAC”), Executive Trustee Services, LLC, dba ETS Services, LLC (“ETS”), and Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. (“MERS”) (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss, (Doc. No. 4), Plaintiff Juana Montreal’s (“Plaintiff’) Complaint, (Doc. No. 1). In accordance with Civil Local Ru...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is the United States’ (“the United States” or “the government”) motions to disqualify the defense attorneys for defendant Israel Morales-Laureno (“Morales”) and defendant Helvis Ortiz-Rivera (“Ortiz”). (Docket Nos. 517 & 521.) Having considered the United States’ motions and the defendants’ responses, (Docket Nos. 526 & 559), the Court DENIES the government’s...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PAUL JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 07-1033 (JDB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Oswaldo Nieves and Jesus Aleantar filed suit against Defendants OPA, Inc. and Chris Georges for the Defendants’ alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq. and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS 105/1 et seq. Plaintiffs have moved for a protective order to stop Defendants’ alleged improper discovery tactics. Additionally...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This civil rights action arises from a fatal fire that occurred on September 20, *2512009, at 102 James Street in Utica, New York. Bruce Bush, Douglas Crane, Gle-nard Drake, Jr., and Terry Singh (collectively “decedents”) perished in the fire. Plaintiffs Nicole Bush, as administrator of Bruce Bush’s estate (“Bush”); Michele Crane, as administrator of ...
Views: 0
RULING RE: CROSS MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. Nos. 58, 59)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff George A. Arasimowicz (“Arasi-mowicz”) commenced this action against defendants All Panel Systems, LLC (“All *214Panel”) and Massey’s Plate Glass & Aluminum, Inc. (“Massey’s,” and with All Panel, “defendants”), his former employers. The Amended Complaint alleges five counts.1 Counts 1 and 2 allege t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Karl B. Manuel is a Delaware prison inmate housed at the Sussex Violation of Probation (“SVOP”) center in Georgetown, Delaware at all times relevant to his claim. On November 9, 2010, plaintiff filed a complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Sergeant Adkins (“Adkins”),1 State of Delaware Department of Tran...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff BRC Rubber & Plastics, Inc. (“BRC”), and Defendant Continental Carbon Company (“Continental”) entered into a Supply Agreement as of January 1, 2010, in which Continental agreed to supply all of BRC’s requirements for carbon black.1 On June 2, 2011, BRC terminated that Agreement and filed this lawsuit against Continental, advancing claims of breach of contact and anti...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
KENNETH BERGE, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 10-0373...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendations (“R & R”) (Doc. 60) filed on March 19, 2013 by the Honorable Erin L. Setser, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. Also before the Court are Defendant Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company’s (“SFB”) Objections (Doc. 61), Plaintiff Vincent Eastwood’s Response to Defe...
Views: 0
Page 78975
MARKMAN ORDER Plaintiff instituted this action for patent infringement and breach of contract after defendant stopped paying royalties under a license agreement between the parties. The Court now construes certain claims within the patents-in-suit following extensive briefing and a Markman hearing. I. Background A. The Parties Plaintiff PerkinElmer Health Sciences, Inc. (“PerkinElmer”) is a Delawa...
Views: 0
*82MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON LA-BRIE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This opinion addresses the threshold issue of whether the “Distributorship Agreement” (Agreement) between plaintiff C.N. Wood Company, Inc. (Wood) and Labrie Environmental Group (Labrie) constitutes a de facto franchise agreement under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93B, § 1. If it does, then Wood’s lawsuit, which was originally file...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Kathy Miles, (“Miles”), a former employee of Corning Incorporated and' a participant in the Corning Incorporated Long Term Disability Plan (the “Plan”), brings this action against the Plan and its administrators, claiming that her long term disability benefits payments *297were improperly and prematurely discontinued, pursuant to the Employee Retireme...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises under the Court’s admiralty jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1333. Shaver Transportation Company (“Shaver” or “Plaintiff’) seeks payment of invoices for towing services it provided to two vessels owned by the United States (“Defendant”). Shaver moved for summary judgment, and the United States moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reason...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255
INTRODUCTION
A South Carolina federal jury sentenced Brandon Basham to death for the 2002 carjacking and kidnapping resulting in the death of Alice Donovan. After an unsuccessful appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, United States v. Basham, 561 F.3d 302 (4th Cir.2009), and the United States Supreme Court, Bas...
Views: 0
*60
MEMORANDUM ORDER
The parties have filed a number of motions to exclude evidence from the upcoming trial of this action, which arises out of a house fire that allegedly started in a home theater system manufactured by defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and sold by defendant Best Buy Co., Inc. By way of subrogation, plaintiff MMG Insurance Co., which insured the house and its conten...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
In 1993, an American expatriate leather-worker, his Chinese partner, and an American investor supplying seed money began an international trading company based in Hong Kong for the purpose of selling leather goods manufactured by a separate Chinese company also run, in part, by the American leatherworker. The leather-worker, the Chinese partner, and the American inve...
Views: 7
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this insurance coverage dispute, Nautilus Insurance Company (“Nautilus”) seeks a declaratory judgment that it has no obligation to defend or indemnify Strongwell Corporation (“Strongwell”) in connection with a lawsuit that Black & Veatch Corporation (“Black & Veatch”) filed against Strongwell in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The cas...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, ALTERNATIVELY, PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Bradley Brazill brings this action against defendants California Northstate College of Pharmacy, LLC (“College”), and California Northstate University, LLC (“CNU”), arising from defendants’ allegedly wrongful conduct related to the termination of plaintiffs employment. Plaintiff brings fou...
Views: 0
ORDER “I can honestly say I don’t think I’ve ever in my life personally encountered somebody as cross-eyed as Mr. Shirley.” —Alan Van Stralen, deputy district attorney The prosecutor was right. Darryl Shirley’s eyes are extremely crossed. His left eye stares straight ahead, while his right eye stares across his face. His mug shot makes clear that these crossed eyes are the defining feature of his ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, the United States of America, has moved for summary judgment (ECF *205No. 13) seeking to enforce its pre-bank-ruptcy federal tax liens with regard to the tax liabilities of Cheryl J. Latos and James E. Anderson1 for the years 1994-1997 against the house and land that Ms. Latos owns in Wood River Junction, Rhode Island. The United States wants this Court to issue an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is the motion of Defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) to dismiss Plaintiff Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s complaint. (Doc. No. 9.) The motion has been fully briefed and is now ripe for disposition. The Court heard oral argument on Defendant’s motion on May 20, 2013. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion.
I. BACKGROU...
Views: 0
RULING RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 64)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Frank Valenzisi (“Valenzisi”) brings this action against defendant Stamford Board of Education (“Stamford”) for damages resulting from Valenzisi’s termination of employment from Stamford High School, where he served as a tenured math teacher. Valenzisi alleges that his termination was in violation of the Am...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
GREGORY T. HOWARD, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-1633 (EGS)...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CHEVRON CORPORATION and
TEXACO PETROLEUM COMPANY,
Petitioners,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1247 (JEB)
REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Petitioners Chevron...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Background
Plaintiffs Celio Neptali Lliguiehuzhca and Carlos Lliguiehuzhca brought this action alleging that defendants Cinema 60, LLC, Steven Galanis, and Anastasios Man-ikes (collectively, “defendants”) violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”). The Court held a bench trial in this matter on March 4 and 5, 2013. At the conclusion of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDERS
Plaintiff, Sheryl Leggs Hamilton, initiated this action as a pro se litigant on December 29, 2010.1 The defendants included plaintiffs former employer — an entity identified in the pleadings as “Coffee Health Group, now known as Regional Care Hospital” — and four former co-workers: Team Leader Melinda England; Manager of Patient Accounts David Davis; Central Business...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S APPEAL OF MAGISTRATE’S ORDER DISQUALIFYING DEFENSE COUNSEL
*1000TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................1000
II. ANALYSIS.............................................................1001
A. Standard Of Review................................................1001
B. Review Of Disqualiñcation Order.............
Views: 0
*88MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY Petitioner Larry Wilkins moves for a Certificate of Appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, authorizing an appeal of this court’s Memorandum and Order denying his Section 2255 petition to vacate his guilty plea.1 United States v. Wilkins, 943 F.Supp.2d 248, 2013 WL 1899614 (D.Mass. May 8, 2013). In his petition, Wilkins as...
Views: 1
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
This matter stems from criminal proceedings against codefendants Carolyn Kravetz and Boris Levitin. On July 22, 2010, and November 15, 2010, this court sentenced Kravetz and Levitin, respectively. Both defendants filed sealed sentencing memoranda and letters of support with the court.
These proceedings caught the attention of non-party reporter Jim Edwards, who filed three ...
Views: 0
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
The court has before it three pending motions. Dkt. ## 15, 28, 29. On November 29, 2012, defendants Regence BlueShield and Cambria Health Solutions, Inc., f/k/a The Regence Group (“Defendants”) filed a Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Dkt. # 15. Plaintiffs J.T. and S.A. (“Plaintiffs”) oppose the motion. Dkt. # 18. While that moti...
Views: 0
Page 79684
ORDER APPROVING CONSENT JUDGMENT AND CERTIFYING SETTLEMENT CLASS
Before the Court is the joint motion1 for approval of the proposed consent judgment2 filed by plaintiffs, LaShawn Jones et al. (“Class Plaintiffs”), intervenor plaintiff, the United States of America (“United States”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and defendant, the Orleans Parish Sheriff (“Sheriff’). Also before the Court is the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court in the above entitled matter are Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendants’ Cross-motions for Summary Judgment. The parties have submitted their briefing on the motions and the matters are now ripe for the Court’s review.
Having fully reviewed the record herein, the Court finds that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
RBS Citizens, N.A. (“RBS”) brings this diversity action against Mumtaz Husain, Mu-rad Husain, Homewood Donuts, Inc. doing business as Dunkin Donuts (“Homewood”), Calumet Foods, Inc. (“Calumet”), Oaklawn Inc. (“Oaklawn”), 183 Donuts, Inc. (“183 Donuts”), South Holland Donuts, Inc. (“South Holland Donuts”), South Holland Management & Property, LLC (“South Holland Mana...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff challenges a provision of an Act Establishing Expanded Gaming in the Commonwealth, 2011 Mass. Acts eh. 194 (“the Gaming Act”), that it alleges unconstitutionally prevents it from competing for a commercial gaming license in southeastern Massachusetts. Pending before the Court are competing motions to intervene filed by the two federally recognized Indian tribes residi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs, a putative class of appointed attorneys for indigent criminal defendants in Onondaga County, New York, represented by plaintiff Jason Zeigler (“Zeig-ler”) (the “attorney class”), and a putative class of indigent criminal defendants in local courts within Onondaga County, New York, represented by Jeff Witkowski (“Witkowski”) (the “crimina...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon Defendants Judson Wagenseller, Tiffany Simmons, Brandon Simmons, Trinity HR Services, LLC, and Trinity HR, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss (collectively “the Wagenseller Defendants”), (Docket No. 31), and Defendants LEED HR, LLC, and Michael K. Schroering’s Motion to Dismiss (collectively “the Schroering Defendants”), (Docket No. 28). Plai...
Views: 0
Page 80155
OPINION
The question before the Court is whether it has subject matter jurisdiction to entertain a lawsuit on behalf of federal retirees who assert that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is deliberately refusing to properly pay them the annuities to which OPM has conceded they are statutorily entitled, or whether their grievance instead must be channeled only through an administrative re...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case comes before the Court on Defendants’ motions to dismiss [16 & 31] and motions to strike the class allegations from the first amended complaint [17 & 32],
I. Background
This is a putative class action brought by residents of Georgia, Texas, Virginia, Florida, Illinois and California based on alleged defects in the fuel systems of 2003-2009 model year W211 E-Class Mercedes-Benz v...
Views: 0
Page 80172
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I.INTRODUCTION
This matter is brought pursuant to §§ 205(g) & 1631(b)(3) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) & 1383(c)(3), to review a final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security denying the plaintiffs claim for Supplemental Security Income benefits. The parties have filed their briefs, including the Administrative Record on...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Rebecca Osborn alleges that defendant J.R.S.-I., Inc. violated the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2), 1692e(10), 1692f, and 1692f(l) (Count I), and also the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”), 815 ILCS 505/2 (Count II). (Dkt. No. 1 (“Compl.”).) Currently pending before the court...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAKEISHA JORDAN, individually and :
on behalf of Y.F., a minor, :
:
Plaintiffs, : Civil Action No.: 11-1642 (RC)
...
Views: 0
SENTENCING OPINION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) EXPLAINING A POLICY DISAGREEMENT WITH THE METHAMPHETAMINE GUIDELINES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1011
A. Indictment, Guilty Plea, And Sentencing Hearing.......................1011
B. Arguments Of The Parties............................................1011
II. ILL...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In a 175-page, 862-paragraph complaint, plaintiff In Touch Concepts, Inc. (“Zcom”) brings this action against defendants. The complaint is neither “short” nor “plain” as required by Rule 8(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P. Counsel for plaintiff is cautioned to be mindful of the mandates of Rule 8(a) in any pleading filed in a federal forum. But for the procedural history of this case, th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant E.D. Bullard Company (“Bullard”) [DE 71], in which Bullard asks the Court to determine whether, among other things and as a matter of law, it ever promised Plaintiff James D. Vogel (“Vogel”) a rose garden and, even if it did, whether that was an enforceable promise. Vogel has filed a Respo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant Amy Nicole McIntosh to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff David Miles Swain has responded to the motion and the court, having considered the memoranda of authorities, together with attachments, submitted by the parties, concludes that t...
Views: 0
Page 80275
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BLOOMBERG L.P.,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 13-523 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION,
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a dispute about a tax refund that the United States (more descriptively, the Internal Revenue Service or IRS) initially granted but now seeks to recover. The taxpayers move (Doc. 16) for summary judgment, and in response the IRS moves (Doc. 17) for summary judgment. Because the IRS concedes the taxpayers’ entitlement to the refund if the taxpayers’ demand was timely, a determinati...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The instant employment discrimination case, involving claims that defendant violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq.) was referred to Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), for supervision of all pre-trial proceedings. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on September 19, 2012. (Dkt. No. 29)
On March 6...
Views: 0
*535
OPINION
Defendant Deutsche Bank AG (“Deutsche Bank” or the “Defendant”) has moved pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the complaint (the “Complaint”) of plaintiff Arco Capital Corporation Ltd. (“Arco” or the “Plaintiff’).
Upon the conclusions set forth below, the motion of Deutsche Bank to dismiss the cause of action for securities fraud i...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On August 16, 2010, the Asociación Pu-errtoriquena de Dueños de Laboratorios Clinicos Privados, Inc. (“Plaintiff’) initiated an administrative action against Hu-mana Health Plans of Puerto Rico, Inc. (“Defendant”). After several rulings by *182the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (“OCI”), the administrative body hearing the complaint, Defendant removed the case to feder...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 10-0096 (ESH)
...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
In this diversity case, plaintiff United Central Bank (“UCB”) seeks to foreclose mortgages on several apartment buildings in Wisconsin. Some of these properties are located in Milwaukee; the rest are located in the Fox Cities. UC named dozens of entities as defendants in its complaint, but only five defendants are actively defending the suit. Those five defendants are KMWC 84...
Views: 2
Page 80376
ORDER AND REASONS
The Court has pending before it Defendant Mark Ryan’s motion to dismiss (Rec. Doc. 7) and motion for sanctions (Rec. Doc. 11). The Court has reviewed the briefs and the applicable law and now issues this Order and Reasons.
I. BACKGROUND
This case arises out of divorce proceedings and subsequent malpractice litigation in Baldwin County, Alabama. Defendant Mark Ryan, an Alabama ...
Views: 0
Page 80377
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action arises out of an alleged breach of a purchase and sale agreement (“P & S”) with respect to a truck stop. Plaintiff Eric Hansen (“Hansen”), the putative buyer, brings suit against Rhode Island’s Only 24 Hour Truck & Auto Plaza, Inc., Best New England, Inc., Thomas A. Gotauco and Lantic Energy, LLC a/k/a Lantic Green Energy (collectively, “defendants”), the putative s...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[Docket No. 41]
Plaintiff Andrew Chapman (“Chapman” or “Plaintiff’) brings this action against three Marblehead police officers, Brandon Finnegan, Dean Peralta, and Shaun Brady, the Chief of Police of the Town of Marble-head, Robert Picariello, and the Town of Marblehead. The action arises out of his arrest for domestic assault and battery on Apr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 20, 2013, Magistrate Judge Acosta issued his Findings and Recommendation (“F & R”) [31] in the above-captioned case recommending that defendants’ motion to dismiss [13] be granted in part and denied in part. Judge Acosta recommended that defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs First Claim for Relief be granted, and that plaintiff be given leave to amend the complaint to ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Tip pooling is the practice of collecting all tips from tipped employees so that they can be redistributed among a group. Until recently, employers could contract with *1219their tipped employees to include non-tipped employees in the tip pool. This allowed employers to set up employment arrangements that incentivized and rewarded the whole line of service, including employees, ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Witt Company brings this antitrust action against Defendant RISO, Inc., contending that Defendant has violated the Sherman and Clayton Acts with an unlawful tying arrangement. Plaintiff also brings state law claims of intentional interference with economic relations, breach of contract, and breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing.
Defendant moves to dis...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by defendant Allstate Indemnity Company (“Allstate”) [Docket No. 42], The Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
I. BACKGROUND1
This case involves a dispute between plaintiff Larry Sipes and Allstate over *1081whether Allstate properly denied coverage for a fire that damaged plainti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the following: (1) Defendant Manley Deas Kochalski LLC’s (“MDK”)1 Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) (Doc. # 51), (2), Defendants Lender Processing Services, Inc., LPS Default Solutions, Inc., and DocX LLC’s (collectively, “LPS”)2 Motion to Dismiss the SAC (Doc. #53) and (3) Defendant Lerner, Sampson & Rothfuss’ (“LSR”) Mo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
RENE OSWALD COBAR, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
FILED
UNITED sTATEs DIsTmCT coURT JUN - 7 2013
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA C|erk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia
Wi1liam Staples, )
Plaintiff, l
v. § Civil Action No. 13-0468 (UNA)
United States of America et al. , §
Defendants. §
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiffs pro se complaint and
application to proce...
Views: 2
*1223ORDER
This quiet title action arises out of the foreclosure of a hen for delinquent homeowner’s association (“HOA”) fees. Pending before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment. For the reasons given herein, the Court grants Plaintiffs motion and denies Defendant’s.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Third-party Defendant Jesus Simiano (“Borrower”) gave Third-party Defendant Silver Sta...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On October 19, 2010, Wenceslao Rosa-do-Ayala died while receiving medical care for a slip-and-fall accident at home. His wife, Trinidad Martinez-Rodriguez (“Martinez”), and their sons, Wilmer and Wendell Rosado-Martinez, sued Ryder Memorial Hospital, Inc. (“Ryder”), Universally Trained Emergency Physicians, P.S.C. (“Physicians”), Admiral Insurance Company (“Admiral”), Dr. Jose...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 10(j) OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT
On May 16, 2013, Petitioner Olivia Garcia, Regional Director of Region 21 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board filed a petition for temporary injunction under section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”) al...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Janna Bullock, a Russian national now living in New York, and RIGroup LLC (“RIGroup USA”) bring this *549action for misappropriation and conversion, fraud, conspiracy to defraud, and breach of fiduciary duty, against Defendants, a group of Russian and Cypriot nationals and entities. At bottom, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, virtually all of whom are Russian citi...
Views: 0
Page 80544
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for the Registered Holders of Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-C28 (“Trust”), acting by and through its Special Servicer CWCapital Asset Management LLC (“CWCAM”), brings this action for breach of contract against Dexia Real Estate Capital Mark...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Gina Valade and David Valade bring this civil rights action alleging claims of false arrest, unlawful strip search, excessive force, sexual assault and malicious prosecution against the City of New York, the New York City Police Department, Police Officer Evrody Seide and ten unidentified police officers. Before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. For the rea...
Views: 0
Page 80614
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DOCKET NO. 53]
Before the court is the motion for partial summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Chiquita Fresh North America, L.L.C. (“Plaintiff’ or “Chiquita”). Plaintiff moves the court to enter summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant Greene Transport Company (“GTC”) on the First and Second Causes of Acti...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court in the above-entitled matter is Defendant’s Objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Order partially granting Plaintiffs Second Motion to Compel Discovery. (Dkt. 54.) The Order requires Defendant to make certain individuals available for deposition in a mutually agreed-upon location in Chile via notice, without issuing subpoenas through the Chilean letters rogatory process. Beca...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE came before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion To Amend The Scheduling Order To Extend Discovery And Expert Deadlines (“Motion”) [ECF No. 58], filed on May 28, 2013. The Order Setting Trial and Pre-Trial Schedule ... (“August 1 Scheduling Order”) [ECF No. 13], was originally issued on August 1, 2012. Subsequently, the Court has granted several extensions of various deadlines, in...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brings suit against Samuel *550Wyly; Donald R. Miller, Jr. as the Independent Executor of the Will and Estate of Charles J. Wyly Jr. (Charles Wyly and, together with Samuel Wyly, the “Wylys”); the Wylys’ attorney Michael C. French;1 and their stockbroker Louis J. Schaufele III2 (together, “Defendants”). The SEC all...
Views: 0
Page 80736
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in one action moves to centralize this litigation, which consists of eight actions pending in seven districts as listed on Schedule A, in the Southern District of Florida.1 Plaintiffs in all actions support centralization. All responding defendants oppose centralization.2 The actions in this litigation involve injurie...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a case commenced pursuant to the Federal Employer Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. §51, in which Plaintiff Anthony Brown (“Plaintiff’) seeks damages stemming from an incident that occurred while he was working for Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation (hereinafter “Amtrak”). Presently before the court is Plaintiffs motion to voluntarily dismiss the action pursuan...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
LJUBICA RAJKOVIC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1508 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT are motions for summary judgment filed by Defendant Western Range Association (‘Western Range”), ECF No. 130, Defendants Max and Ann Fernandez (“Fernandez”), ECF No. 135, and Plaintiffs Francisco Javier Castro, Eduardo Martinez, and Elvis Ruiz (“Plaintiffs”), ECF No. 140. The Court heard oral argument on the motions. Michele Besso appeared on...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Garry Randolph Cole’s (“Cole”) motion to suppress (Dkt. 23). The Court has considered the pleadings filed in support of and in opposition to the motion, heard oral argument of counsel and testimony of witnesses, and reviewed the remainder of the file and hereby grants the motion for the reasons stated her...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
By Opinion and Order dated March 25, 2013 (the “March Opinion”), this Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ complaint for failure to serve Defendants Baidu.com Inc. (“Baidu”) and the People’s Republic of China in light of the fact that China had declined to effect service pursuant to Article 13 of the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Anthony Pagliaccetti (“Petitioner”) is a prisoner at the State Correctional Institution — Mahanoy in Frackville, Pennsylvania. Petitioner filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Habeas Petition”) challenging his custody. Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge recommended denial of the Habeas Petition without an eviden-tiary hearing. Petitioner’s c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendants object to the report and recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge Facciola, ECF No. 49, recommending that this Court deny the cross-motions for summary judgment pendente lite and remand the case. ECF No. 56. Because the defendant agency has taken actions which render this case moot, the Court overrules the R & R and dismisses the case.
I. BACKGROUND1
A. The Reg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion to Remand, filed by Plaintiff Ron Richard (“Richard”) [Docket Entry # 6]. The principal question raised by this Motion is whether Richard effectively limited his potential recovery to an amount below the jurisdictional threshold, thereby defeating diversity jurisdiction. Finding that he has, the Court GRANTS the Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
T...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff Janie Moore filed this action against defendants Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; Southern Company Services, Inc.; and Group Life Insurance Plan, Dependent Life Benefits for Southern Company Services, Inc., and Associated or Affiliated Companies, claiming a violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. and seeking to-...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In April 2011, law enforcement agents in Maryland seized cocaine that had an estimated street value of more than $13 million dollars. That seizure, as well as other evidence obtained during a joint State and federal investigation, led to a federal indictment of six members of a drug-trafficking organization operating in the Baltimore area (the “Organization” or “Hayes DTO”) (EC...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PETITION PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
ORDER CERTIFYING APPEAL NOT TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH AND ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
Before the Court is the Petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed by Petitioner Ronald Donnell Moore, Tennessee Department of Correction prisoner number 120577, an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff World Outreach Conference Center (‘World Outreach”), an Illinois not-for-profit corporation, is a religious assembly or institution protected by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“the Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(a)(l). See World Outreach Conference Ctr. v. City of Chicago, 591 F.3d 531, 535 (7th Cir.2009). (“[E]ven the recreat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Nonparty Nisen & Elliott, LLC moves the Court to bar Defendants’ use or disclosure of two memoranda in these proceedings, which it contends are protected by the work-product privilege, find that the memoranda remain privileged, and award sanctions. For the reasons stated below, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part. Defendants’ Cross-Motion to Strike is d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The defendants — the Chicago Board of Education, all of its members, *828and Jean-Claude Brizard, the CEO of Chicago Public Schools during the relevant time period1 — move to dismiss the Amended Complaint of Janet Fennerty, a former high school teacher, who alleges that she was improperly discharged in the course of a layoff of over 1300 teachers. Fennerty, who had ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) sued Yonghui “Harry” Zhang, All Know Holdings, Ltd., Sha Chen, and Zhi Yao (collectively, “Defendants”), among others, for insider trading in violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5. Defendants move for summary ju...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In an order entered July 24, 2012, 886 F.Supp.2d 1007 (W-D.Wis.2012), the court found that defendants Alliance Holdings, Inc., A.H.I., Inc., AH Transition Corp., David B. Fenkell, Pamela Klute, James Mastrangelo, and Jeffrey A. Seefeldt had violated various fiduciary duties owed to the Trachte Building Systems, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“Trachte ESOP”) and to the Allia...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PATRICIA A. BELL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil A...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
JOSEF F. BOEHM, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
PerfectVision Manufacturing, Inc., brings this declaratory judgment action seeking a judicial determination that a product that it manufactures does not infringe upon patents owned by PPC Broadband, Inc., d/b/a PPC. PPC has offered PerfectVision a covenant not to sue, which PPC contends means that there is no case or controversy between the parties and thus that the Court lack...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Metropolitan Regional Information Systems, Inc. (“MRIS”) filed suit against Defendants American Home Realty Network (“AHRN”) and AHRN CEO Jonathan Cardella on March 28, 2012, alleging copyright infringement, violations of the Lanham Act, and tortious conversion and unjust enrichment. Doc. No. 1. MRIS’s claims are based on AHRN’s alleged reproduction of real estate l...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Defendant, George Hofineister (“Hofineister”) removed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, to this Court asserting federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). (Notice of Removal, Mar. 20, 2013, Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff, ICON MW, LLC (“ICON”) filed a timely response asserting lack of complet...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND/OR INFORMATION WITHHELD BY DEFENDANT ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL, LLC (DOC. 194)
This case is presently in the class certification discovery phase. Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to compel the production of 38 documents and/or information withheld by Defendant Aramark Uniform & Car...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Etta Scott brings this putative class action against Westlake Services, LLC (‘Westlake”), doing business as Westlake Financial Services, alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the “TCPA” or the “Act”), 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq. Westlake asserts that it made a full offer of relief to Scott on both of her claims prior to Scott moving for class cer...
Views: 0
Page 81134
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 5), Plaintiffs’ Response in opposition (Dkt. 8), and Defendants’ Reply (Dkt. 12). The Court, haying reviewed the motion, response, reply, and being otherwise advised in the premises, concludes that the motion should be granted and this case should be dismissed.
BACKGROUND
This is an immigration case. Plaintiff Su...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a suit by Sandi Lazette, a former employee of the defendant Célico Partner*751ship, d/b/a Verizon Wireless (Verizon),, and her supervisor, defendant Kulmatycki. The gravamen of the action is that, after plaintiff left Verizon’s employee and returned her company-issued blackberry (which she used and refers to in her complaint as her “phone”), Kulmatycki, during the ensuing eighteen m...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I.INTRODUCTION This action arises out of an altercation between the plaintiffs and various Brock-ton police officers on November 15, 2008. The plaintiffs have asserted claims for violations of their federal and state constitutional rights as well as violations of their rights under state law. Discovery is complete, and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO VACATE UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(Dkt. No. 477)
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Anthony Matos has filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging the performance of his trial and appellate attorneys. While these are claims that are normally appropriate for collateral review, Petitioner previously filed a § 2255 petition to reinstate his d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
This is an action for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, breach of contract, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”), and conspiracy.1 Plaintiff Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “AMD”) has already sought and received a Preliminary Injunction (“PI”) against four defendants, and a Temporary Restr...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Theresa Wilson-Riehardson (“plaintiff’) brings this action alleging that her former employer, Regional Transit Service, Inc. (“RTS”), RTS Chief Administrative Officer Deborah Griffith (“Griffith”), and RTS employee Dr. Elaine Tu-naitis (“Tunaitis”), discriminated against her on the basis of disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On July 22, 2011, the Plaintiffs Moosa Ebrahimian and Sheila Ebrahimian filed this action against the Defendant insurer Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company in New York State Supreme Court, Nassau County. The complaint relates to an insurance policy which the Plaintiffs allege the Defendant breached by disclaiming certain coverage for damage sustained by the P...
Views: 0
ORDER
The court has before it for consideration Patricia Harp and Angela Baldasare’s “Motion for Summary Judgment” [19] and defendants’ “Amended Motion for Summary Judgment” [39].
I. General Factual and Procedural Background
This lawsuit arose from the financial failure of a residential subdivision. On August 6, 2007, each defendant executed and delivered a personal guaranty to Appalachian Comm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this shareholder derivative suit, Plaintiffs allege that a majority of the Board of Directors of SAIC, Inc. was on actual or constructive notice of significant wrongdoing in relation to the lucrative contract for a program called CityTime, but nonetheless consciously ignored or perpetuated that wrongdoing. Plaintiffs further allege various claims arising from SAIC’s hand...
Views: 1
Page 81396
DECISION AND ORDER
This is a pro se prisoner action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 7, 2013, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a mandate in this case (Dkt. # 50), vacating this Court’s dismissal of the complaint, with instructions that this Court determine whether the inmate plaintiffs filing of administrative grievances tolled the statute of limitations on his claims, so as t...
Views: 0
OPINION
INDEX
Page
Prior Proceedings...............................................................571
The Parties.....................................................................571
Findings of Fact.................................................................572
I. The Background of the Transaction....................................572
II. The Agreements................................
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter arises out of multiple international cargo shipments, arranged by Plaintiff Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (“Mit-sui”), that were diverted from their intended inland destinations. On June 27, 2012, Mitsui filed a Complaint in New Jersey Superior Court against a host of motor carriers, alleging claims for fraud, violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 et s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER’S MOTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2255 TABLE OF CONTENTS J. INTRODUCTION...................................... 882 A. The Criminal Proceedings............................................882 B. The § 2255 Motion...................................................883 *882II. LEGAL ANALYSIS......................................................884 A. Standar...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has for its consideration the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendants (Doc. 52). Plaintiff filed a response (Doc. 63), and defendants filed a reply brief (Doc. 74). Plaintiff also filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 48, 49), to which defendants responded (Doc. 62), and plaintiff filed a reply (Doc. 71). Upon consideration of the parties’ filings...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court upon cross-motions for summary judgment on Plaintiffs appeal of the Commissioner’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits. [D.E. 10, 11], It has come to this Court’s attention that counsel for Plaintiff, Mr. Johnnie Turner,1 has failed to abide by the Court’s standard scheduling order, which requires motions to both 1) include a statement ...
Views: 0
Page 81634
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (D.E. 7) THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint and to Strike Plaintiffs Demand for Trial by Jury (“Motion,” D.E. 7), filed on February 4, 2013. On February 21, 2013, Plaintiff filed a response (“Response,” D.E. 13), and on March 7, 2013, Plaintiff filed a supplemental memoran...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in seven actions move to centralize this litigation in the Southern District of West Virginia. Plaintiffs in two actions pending in Alabama support the motion. Common defendants1 oppose the motion for centralization. Defendant WL Gore & Assoc. (Gore), also named as a defendant in the Middle District of Georgia Sitten action...
Views: 0
Page 81639
*1370TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendants Doctor’s Associates, Inc., and Subway Sandwich Shops, Inc., move for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of Illinois. This litigation currently consists of seven actions pending in five districts, as listed on Schedule A.1 Plaintiffs in all actions support centralization in this district. On the ...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in the District of Vermont Burlington Drug action moves to centralize this litigation in the District of Vermont. This litigation currently consists of three actions pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and the District of Vermont, as listed on Schedule A.1 *1366All the respond...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in a Northern District of California action move for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of California. This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in six districts, as listed on Schedule A.1 Plaintiffs in all actions support the motion in its entirety. Defendant AnheuserBusch Companies, ...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in three actions seek centralization of the actions listed on Schedule A in the Central District of California. The plaintiffs’ motion encompasses seven actions pending in four districts.1 This litigation concerns the marketing, sale and advertising of the mileage estimates of Ford Fusion Hybrid and C-Max Hybrid vehicles. Al...
Views: 0
Page 81646
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant HSBC Bank USA, N.A. (HSBC) moves to centralize this litigation in the Eastern District of New York. This litigation currently con*1359sists of two actions pending in the Eastern District of New York and one action pending in the Eastern District of Virginia, as listed in Schedule A. All responding parties support centralizat...
Views: 0
Page 81652
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION. 484
II. FACTS. 485
490 III. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS.
490 A. Summary Judgment Standard.
490 B. Determining Genuine Disputes of Material Fact.
492 C. Plaintiffs Alleged Genuine Disputes of Material Fact.
492 1. Contested Facts as to Baier.
493 2. Contested Facts as to Baran and Winik.
498 IV. SECTION 1983 CLAMS AGANST WINIK, BARAN, AND BAER ..
498 A. Plaintiffs Unlawf...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART OFFICIAL-CAPACITY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 32)
I. INTRODUCTION
This case involves a challenge to what plaintiffs say is a policy, custom and practice of questioning Muslim-American’s as they enter the United States regarding their religious beliefs and practices in violation of their First and Fifth Amendment rights. Plaintiff...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant Innovation Ventures, LLC, moves to centralize this litigation in the Central District of California. This litigation currently consists of nine actions pending in eight district courts, as listed in Schedule A.1 All responding parties agree that centralization of these actions is appropriate, but disagree as to the transferee...
Views: 1
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant Viacom Inc. (Viacom) moves to centralize this litigation in the District of New Jersey. This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in six district courts, as listed in Schedule A. All responding parties agree that centralization of these actions is appropriate, but disagree as to the transferee district. In ad...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendants The McGrawHill Companies, Inc., and Standard & *1361Poor’s Financial Services LLC (collectively S & P) seek centralization of actions challenging S & P’s representations about its impartiality and objectivity in the rating of structured finance securities in the Southern District of New York. This litigation currently cons...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner, Joaquin Lassalle-Velázquez, brings this pro-se petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 for relief from sentencing by a federal court, alleging that the sentence imposed violated his rights under federal law. He requests an order to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence imposed in Cr. No. 08-037. (Docket No. 1.) I. Background On January 30, 2008, the grand jury render...
Views: 1
Page 81727
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
HAROLD H. HODGE, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-00104 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
PAMELA TALKIN, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ADAM WETZEL,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil No. 12-1341 (JDB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case arises out of duplicate requests ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 165) and Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 170). The motions are fully briefed. For the reasons set herein, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ motion and deny Defendant’s cross-motion.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiffs Tom Bean and Dennis Kunkel are professional photographers. Defendant Pearson is a publisher o...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the plaintiffs’ motion requesting compliance with the terms of the settlement agreement (Docket # 67), and the parties’ show cause responses (Dockets # 72 and 77) as to whether the Court has jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement (Docket # 58). After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the plaintiffs’ motion is hereby DENIED ...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. 15)
The Court has reviewed the May 24, 2013 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (doc. 15), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2) has expired, hereby ADOPTS sa...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Dixie Brewing Company’s motion for a preliminary and permanent injunction. For the reasons that *811follow, the motion is DENIED for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Background
This dispute arises out of the ongoing construction of the Louisiana State University-Veterans Affairs Medical Center located in the New Orleans Mid-City neighborhood, which wi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Bettina M. Whyte, acting in her capacity as the trustee of the SemGroup Litigation Trust (the “Trustee”), brings the above-captioned case seeking to avoid certain transactions between several Sem-Group entities1 and defendants Barclays Bank PLC and Barclays Capital, Inc. (collectively, “Barclays”). On August 22, 2012, the defendants moved this Court to dismiss the Co...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants TICO Insurance Company and Infinity Assurance Insurance Company (collectively “Infinity”) [Doc. # 62]. After viewing all the facts in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, the Court GRANTS Infinity’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. Background
Plaintiff Ben Purscell purchased an insurance policy issued by Infinity a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Erie Glatt, Alexander Footman, Kanene Gratis, and Eden Antalik bring this putative class action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), New York Labor *522Law (“NYLL”), and California Unfair Competition Law (“CAUCL”) against Defendants Fox Searchlight Pictures Inc. (“Searchlight”) and Fox Entertainment Group, Inc. (“FEG”). Plaintiffs contend that Searchlight a...
Views: 1
FILED
JUN 1 1 2013
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
U
)
) Action No. 12-
) (UNDER SE )
IN RE: PETITION 0F LUKE NICHTER -74 (RCL)
EX PARTE MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now before the Court is the petitioner's Motion [l] to unseal records associated with
United States v. Liddy, District Court docket number 1827-72. Upon consideration of th...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY
AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-754 (GK)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Citiz...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
COREY McFADDEN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-940 (R...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRIAN BURKE,
Plaintiff / Counter-Defendant,
Civil Action No. 08-0364
v. DAR
RECORD PRESS, INC.,
Defendant / Counter-C...
Views: 0
ORDER AND NOW, this 12th day of June, 2013, after Plaintiffs Thurman Mearin and Nathan Riley filed an action in the above-captioned case, and after a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint was submitted on behalf of Defendants, and after a Report and Recommendation was filed by the United States Magistrate Judge and the parties were granted until June 7, 2013, to file written objections ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a nationwide collective action alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and an Illinois state law putative class action based on the application of an automatic 30-minute meal break deduction policy without ensuring that employees do not work through all or part of their meal break. This court has original jurisdiction over...
Views: 0
Page 82272
ORDER INTRODUCTION “If you shoot at a king, you must kill him.”1 The modern political version: “Make sure you pick the winner.” Plaintiffs Terri Ezell (“Ezell”) and Donna Tompkins (“Tompkins”), Muscogee County deputy sheriffs, picked their boss, incumbent Muscogee County Sheriff Ralph Johnson (“Johnson”), when they actively campaigned for him in his reelection bid against challenger John Darr (“...
Views: 0
SENTENCING OPINION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) TABLE OF CONTENTS J. INTRODUCTION........................................................899 A. The Charges........................................................899 B. The Trials..........................................................899 C. The Sentencing Hearing .............................................900 II. LEG...
Views: 1
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, two motions for centralized pretrial proceedings have been brought before the Panel. The cases in this litigation involve alleged defects in Stryker’s Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip implant products. Plaintiffs’ claims focus upon the performance of these products, particularly the hip replacement devices’ propensity to cause fr...
Views: 0
Page 82343
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Memorandum and Order addresses Defendant AXIS Insurance Company’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 35, and supporting memorandum, ECF No. 35-1; Plaintiff Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 37, and supporting memorandum, ECF No. 37-1; Defendant’s Reply and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Carole MacDonald, Marilyn Salisbury, John Golisz, Richard Takac, Juanita Cluffer-Washington, and Hexin McPhee bring this action against Defendant Unisys Corporation (“Unisys”) for violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Plaintiffs bring this action individually and as a collective action on behalf of themselves and all other ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiffs Claire Lebowitz and Keegan Stephan bring this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of New York, NYPD Patrol Officer Adrianne Edwards, and NYPD Officer Does 1-10 (collectively, the “City”), asserting claims related to plaintiffs’ arrest in Zuccotti Park on January 10, 2012, and their treatment immediately thereafter. The City has served a testimonial subpoena...
Views: 0
Page 82441
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court is the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 25) filed by Plaintiff Employers Mutual Casualty Company (“EMC”). The court has considered the arguments made in the following documents:
• EMC’s “Memorandum Brief in Support of Its Motion for Final Summary Judgment” (Doc. 26);
• A Response (Doc. 30) filed by Defendants Charles Larry Smith and Smith Construction & Develo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1. INTRODUCTION
A. Summary of Mr. Chancey’s Claims
Plaintiff Robert A. Chancey (“Mr. Chancey”) initiated this job discrimination lawsuit against Defendants Fairfield Southern Co., Inc. (“Fairfield”) and United States Steel Corporation (“USS”) arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the “ADA”), as amended in 2008 (the “ADAA”),1 on October 11, 2011. (Doc. 1). While M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. The defendants have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 69), to which the plaintiffs filed a Response in opposition (Docket No. 79), and the defendants filed a Reply (Docket No. 82). The plaintiffs have also filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 72), to which the defendants filed a ...
Views: 0
Page 82553
*1193
ORDER
Before the Court is Max Specialty Insurance Company’s Amended Motion for Summary Judgment as to Eye in the Sky Pictures, Inc. (Dkt. 84), the Memorandum in Opposition (Dkt. 86), and the Reply. (Dkt. 89). After careful consideration of the motion, the applicable law, and .the entire file, the Court concludes the motion should be granted.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Max Specialty Insurance Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Camille Velez-Rive. (Docket No. 35.) The magistrate judge recommends that defendant Luis Guzman-Batista’s (“Guzman”) motion to suppress, (Docket No. 20), be granted. (Docket No. 35 at p. 22.) After an independent review of the record, the United States’ (“the United States” or “the government...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff Biscayne Cove Condominium *1295Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Both Counts of the Second Amended Complaint (DE #101, 4/5/13).
BACKGROUND
The plaintiff filed its two-count second amended complaint on August 10, 2012. See Second Amended Complaint (DE # 38, 8/10/12). In Count I, the plaintiff sought declaratory relief that the d...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. # 11), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, it ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On or about July 5, 2012, the Plaintiff Town of Southold (the “Plaintiff’ or the “Town”) commenced an action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Suffolk against the Defendants Go Green Sanitation, Inc. (“Go Green”) and Frank Fisher (“Fisher” and collectively the “Defendants”), seeking an injunction shutting down Go Green’s recycling and refuse...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In December 2010, Plaintiff Manuel Moses, as executor of the Estate of Zoran Teodorovic, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and related state law claims, against Westchester County, the Westchester Department of Corrections and Paul M. Cote alleging violations of the deceased’s civil rights as a result of a beating in which Mr. Cote, a corrections off...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the mandate, on remand, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, instructing this Court “to consider what changes are required to the terms of the injunction consistent with this opinion”1 and on defendant Lawson Software, Inc.’s (“Lawson”) MOTION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 60 TO DISSOLVE OR MODIFY THE MAY 23, 2011 INJUN...
Views: 0
Page 82635
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND
Plaintiffs Beef Products, Inc. (BPI), BPI Technology, Inc. (BPI Tech), and Freezing Machines, Inc. (FMI) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) originally brought this action on September 13, 2012, in the Circuit Court of Union County, South Dakota. Defendants 1 removed the action to this court on *938October 24, 2012, on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. Dock...
Views: 0
*866MEMORANDUM OPINION For the reasons set forth in this Memorandum Opinion and on the record on May 7, 2013, Jose Armando Bran’s (“Bran”) MOTION IN LIMINE TO DISMISS THE SECOND SUPERCEDING [sic] INDICTMENT (Docket No. 213 (sealed), 271 (redacted))1 was granted in part and denied in part by the Order dated May 8, 2013 (Docket No. 245). INTRODUCTION On December 4, 2012, Bran was charged in a Second...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Now before the court is the motion of defendant in the above-captioned action, United States of America, to dismiss all claims and causes of action of plaintiff, Othniel McKinney, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Having considered the motion and accompanying documents, plaintiffs response, the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are laborers and foremen formerly employed by Capala Brothers, Inc. (“Capala Bros.”), a construction services company, Robert Capala, and Pawel Capala (collectively “defendants”) who seek to recover on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated unpaid wages and overtime arising out of defendants’ alleged failure to comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff is a widow who seeks to recover life insurance benefits she claims she is due under her late husband’s employer-sponsored life insurance plan. Specifically, in three separate counts, plaintiff sues (1) her late husband’s employer for breach of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), *85329 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq.; (2) the insurer t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Hayward Police Officers used a police dog to track an armed suspect who fled after robbing a Domino’s Pizza at night. Nicky, a Dutch Shepherd trained to bite and hold, guided the officers to an eight-foot wall. Police Officer Loring Cox, without warning, lifted Nicky over the wall and lowered him on a thirty-three-foot leash in...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Edwin R. Jonas brings this action against a newspaper, its editor, and one of its reporters for allegedly publishing three defamatory articles about him during his campaign for election as Lake Gounty Justice of the Peace. The newspaper, Defendant Lake County Leader, its editor, Defendant Bryce Gary, and its reporter, Defendant Emilie Richardson (collectively “Defendants”), moved ...
Views: 0
Page 82996
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On September 14, 2012, Joao Bock Transaction Services, LLC (“JBTS”) filed a complaint against defendant Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (“Jack Henry”), alleging that certain Jack Henry products, “such as but not limited to its ‘goDough’ and ‘NetTeller Online Banking1 products,” infringe U.S. Patent No. 7,096,003 (“the '003 Patent”). (D.I. 1) On December 3, 2012, J...
Views: 0
ORDER
Now before the Court is Defendant Larry Scott Gresham’s (“Gresham”) Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6), filed on February 21, 2013. (Doc. 7) Plaintiff filed a Response on March 21, 2013. (Doc. 12) Defendant filed a Reply on April 4, 2013. (Doc. 14) After reviewing the parties’ briefs, the evidence, and the applicable law, the Court DENIES Gresham’s Motion to Dismiss.1
I. Background
Gre...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER On September 13, 2012, the United States Drug Enforcement Administration seized over $100,000.00 worth of incense products from The Smoke Shop in Delavan, Wisconsin, claiming that they needed to test the products for the presence of controlled substances. The owner of The Smoke Shop, David S. Yarmo, initially consented to the seizure under the assumption that the products would ...
Views: 0
Page 83086
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEON JACKSON,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 13-205 (CKK)
v.
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(June 13...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES ex rel.
ANTHONY OLIVER,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 08-0034 (CKK)
v.
PHILIP MORRIS USA INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, et
al.,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 11-1777 (CKK)
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO VACATE, SET ASIDE OR CORRECT SENTENCE BY A PERSON IN FEDERAL CUSTODY UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner Colin Nathanson is serving a 27-year sentence for organizing and directing a sham investment scheme through which he defrauded more than 2,500 victims of at least $24 million over several years. On October 20, 2008, Mr. Nathan-son pleaded guilty to all coun...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Bryon Jones moves to suppress evidence seized from 122 Melville Street in Fall River, Massachusetts on the ground that the warrant lacked particularity, the Fall River officers did not have authority to execute the warrant, and that the information in the warrant was stale when it was executed. Defendant also ar*318gues that the audio and video evidence from...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Eugene F. Kimbrough has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that he is being held in state custody in violation of his federal constitutional rights. Dkt. No. 1, Petition (“Pet.”).1 Petitioner’s state custody arises from a judgment of conviction entered in Onondaga County Court, following a jury trial, o...
Views: 0
ORDER ADDRESSING DEFENDANTS’ PENDING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Presently before the Court are two motions for summary judgment,1 filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 on April 13, 2012, by Defendants, the Indiana State Teachers Association (“the ISTA”) et al. [Docket No. 170], and the National Education Association (“the NEA”) [Docket No. 174], respectively. Plaintiff opposes bo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This dispute calls on the Court to determine whether a non-compete clause is enforceable under New Jersey law. In January 2013, Plaintiff Joseph Marinelli, a longtime employee of Defendant Medco *306Health Services (“Medco”),1 resigned his position with Medco and began working at Coventry Health Care (“Coventry”) as its Vice President of Medicare Part D Operations. After Me...
Views: 0
*200
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Several former Westernbank directors and officers (“the D & O’s”)1 brought a third-party complaint against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“the FDIC”) and the United States of America (“United States”) (collectively “Defendants”) under the Federal Torts Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq., and 12 U.S.C. § 1819(a) (the “ ‘sue and be sued’ clause”) (Do...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On December 29, 2011, plaintiff Sidney Gordon filed this class action, bringing federal securities law claims and related state law claims on behalf of a putative class of shareholders of Sigma Designs, Inc. (“Sigma”) who sold shares between July 13, 2007, and November 28, 2007. On April 9, 2012, 2012 WL 1193844, the Court appointed Gordon and Jeffery Tauber as co-lead plainti...
Views: 0
Memorandum Order
Christopher Walker (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against his former employer, the law firm, Linklaters LLP (“Defendant” or “Linklaters”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”). Plaintiff, who is African American, asserts race-based discrimination claims, alleging unequal terms and conditions of his employment, failure to promote and...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Theresa Giacchetto (“Plaintiff’) asserts claims against Defendant Patehogue-Medford Union Free School District (the “School District” or “Defendant”) for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq., and the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”), N.Y. Executive Law §§ 290, et seq. Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs Robert Sullivan (“Mr. Sullivan”) and Mary Sullivan (“Mrs. Sullivan”) bring this suit against Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide, Inc. (“Starwood”) for negligence and loss of consortium. Mr. Sullivan claims that while vacationing in China, he fell over a hazardous object in the parking garage of a hotel operated and controlled by Starwood. Starwood moves ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER This action arises out of the denial by the Defendant Board of Zoning Appeals for the Town of Brookhaven of the Plaintiff Michael DeFalco’s application for a variance on his property in Brookhaven. On November 30, 2011, DeFalco and William Mathews (“the Plaintiffs”) filed an amended complaint against the Defendants Paul M. Dechanee Chairman of the Board of Zoning A...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Findings and Recommendation having been filed and served on all parties on May 17, 2013, and no objections having been filed by any party,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 74.2, the “FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION THAT (1) PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION TO PRO...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Richard Vaccariello (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against Defendant XM Satellite Radio, Inc. (“Defendant”) under New York General Business Law § 349 (“GBL § 349”) and New York General Obligations Law § 5-903 (“GOL § 5-903”). Plaintiff asserts that Defendant, through its practice of automatically renewing customers’ subscriptions, violated GBL § 349 and was unjustly enriched, an...
Views: 0
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Named Plaintiffs Diana Ellis, James Schillinger, and Ronald Lazar filed a Class Action Complaint against Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., and Chase Home Finance LLC (collectively, “Chase” or “Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiffs allege Chase engaged in fraudulent practices by charging marke...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CHERYL RIVERA,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 11-1305 (BJR)
v.
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON CROSS-
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PETER ROSS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-742 (JEB)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
More than six years ago, Plaintiff Peter Ross pl...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
LINDSAY JENKINS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
FREDERICK B. HOLLIE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Memorandum Opinion addresses Plaintiff Sylvia Wonasue’s Amended Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint, ECF No. 47; the Opposition that Defendants University of Maryland Alumni Association (“UMAA”) and Danita Nias filed, ECF No. 50, and Plaintiffs Reply, ECF No. 58.1 A *106hearing is not necessary. See Loe. R. 105.6. For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiffs Am...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Court is once again, although this time for different reasons, called to pass upon Nader Modanlo’s contention that the Government is collaterally es-topped from criminally prosecuting him for (1) conspiring to violate and ultimately violating the United States trade embargo on Iran, 31 C.F.R. § 560.201 et seq., (2) money laundering, 18 U.S.C. § 1957(a), and (3) bankruptcy...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
YEETA L. WARD, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On November 27, 2012, after a two-day trial, a jury entered a verdict in favor of plaintiff Robert Winston and against Officer O’Brien, one of two Chicago Police Officers named as defendants in this excessive force action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The jury awarded plaintiff nominal compensatory damages of one dollar, plus $7,500 in punitive damages. Now before...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In this lawsuit alleging employment discrimination based on age and disability, Defendant Oregon State Board of Higher Education moves to exclude the expert report and testimony of Jean Stockard, Ph.D., Plaintiffs expert relating to the tenure-track review, evaluation, and termination processes and procedures in the Oregon University System and the process and procedure used in D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Dyson, Inc.’s (Dyson) motion for partial summary judgment. This matter is also before the court on Defendant Bissell Homecare, Inc.’s (Bissell) motion to exclude the expert report of Ran Kivetz (Kivetz), Bissell’s motion to disqualify Susan Goldsmith (Goldsmith) from serving as an expert, and Bissell’s motion for summary judgment. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This employment action is before the court on Defendant’s1 motion for summary judgment. (Doc. '24.) Plaintiff has responded (Doc. 36), and Defendant has replied (Doc. 38). For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be granted and the case dismissed.
1. BACKGROUND
The facts, construed in the light most favorable to Plaintiff as the non-moving party, show the fo...
Views: 0
Page 83894
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
In Zadvydas v. Davis, the Supreme Court held that individuals who have been found unlawfully present in the United States and are scheduled for removal may not be detained for a period longer than six months where there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.1 The New York Times Co. and its employee Maria Sacchetti, a repor...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendant is charged by indictment with one count of bank robbery. During his *1015initial appearance and arraignment on June 12, 2013, he made an oral pro se1 motion to proceed in this case under a pseudonym, such as “John Doe.” After hearing defendant’s argument, I denied the motion without prejudice and stated that I would be willing to reconsider if defendant submitted legal authorities ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW
This matter comes before the Court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Tennessee. Appellant United States of America (“United States”) appeals the decision of the Bankruptcy Court that the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) bars enforcement of restitution orders as against the property of a bankruptcy estate and that 18 U.S.C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Patricia Mitchell Tracey and Larry Austin (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, sued First American Title Ins. Co. *808(“First American”)1 for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) violations, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, and other claims. Pending is First American’s supplemental motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ cla...
Views: 0
Page 83972
ORDER RE: APPLICATION FOR ORDER
Before the Court is Prabhat K. Dubey’s (“Petitioner’s”) Application for an Order Directing MTI Laboratory (“MTI”) to Produce Documents For Use in an International Tribunal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782. (Appl., Docket No. 1.) MTI opposes the application. (Opp’n, Docket No. 13.) Petitioner filed a reply. (Reply, Docket No. 23.) For the following reasons, the Court DE...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff is currently an inmate at the Massachusetts Correctional Institution in Norfolk, Massachusetts (“MCI-Norfolk”). Defendants are the superintendent and treasurer, respectively, of the Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center (“SBCC”), where plaintiff was previously incarcerated. In his civil rights complaint plaintiff alleges that defendants, through their actions and their...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
Before the Court are Centro Medico del Turabo, Inc. d/b/a Hospital HIMA-San Pablo de Caguas (“CMT”), Corporación Puertorriqueña de Salud (“CPS”), and Joaquin Rodriguez Benitez’s (“Rodriguez”) motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). (Docket Nos. 40 & 43.) Plaintiffs Claudio Polo-Calderon and Jonathan Polo-Echevarria opposed these mot...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter is before the court on three motions for summary judgment.
On December 16, 2012 plaintiffs filed their Notice of Motion, seeking partial summary judgment. On December 17, 2012 Defendants County of Delaware, Mary Germond, Meta Wertz, Beth Prodoehl, Patricia McGettigan and Gina Giancristiforo’s Motion for Summary Judgment was filed.1 Also on December 17, 2012 the Motion of Def...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Media Power Group, Inc., Eduardo R. Albino, Albino’s spouse Jane Doe, and their conjugal partnership seek attorney’s fees and costs of $209,567.70 from plaintiffs Latin American Music Co. Inc. and ACEMLA de Puerto Rico, Inc. Plaintiffs sued for alleged copyright infringement regarding twenty-one songs. Defendants won summary judgment on twelve claims. Docket No. 148...
Views: 0
*542
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
I. Introduction and Background
This litigation, now in its tenth year, consolidates personal injury and property damage claims against various terrorist organizations, Islamic charities, and foreign banks, arising out of their alleged involvement in the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The case has a complex and sprawling procedural history, which has ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation (“SSWF”) and Irving I. Stone Foundation (“IISF,” and collectively with SSWF the “Plaintiffs”) filed the complaint in this action against Defendants J. Ezra Merkin (“Merkin”) and Gabriel Capital Corporation (“GCC,” and collectively with Merkin the “Defendants”) alleging a variety of claims under New York common law including Breach ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs Motion For Entry of Protective Order Relating to Confidentiality And Non-Disclosure (Doc. 13) and Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents, Strike Or Overrule Objections, And For Sanctions. (Doc. 15.) On June 11, 2013 the Court conducted a telephonic hearing to address the motions. For the reasons discussed on the record, and as summariz...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the court is defendant Shannon County School District 65-1’s (“District”) motion for summary judgment. (Docket 56). The court referred the motion to Magistrate Judge Veronica L. Duffy for resolution. (Docket 65). On March 5, 2013, Magistrate Judge Duffy filed a report recommending the court grant in part and deny in part defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (Docket 69). M...
Views: 0
ORDER FOR ENTRY OF ORDER, PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND FINAL JUDGMENT ON CONSENT On June 10, 2013, the parties in Civil Action No. 13-cv-01389-RPM and Civil Action No. 13-cv-01431-RPM filed an Order, Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment on Consent, constituting, in effect, a stipulation for the entry of a consent judgment adjudicating the issues raised by the Plaintiffs in these two actions. This c...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff C & N Corporation, doing business as Door Peninsula Winery (DPW), filed this action alleging Defendants Illinois River Winery, Inc. (IRW) and its owner, Gregory Kane, are infringing' on DPW’s rights by selling a spiced apple wine called “Hallowine.” DPW contends it has protectable rights in the HALLOWINE and DOO...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
Criminal No. 12-65 (CKK)
PAUL DAVID HITE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(June 14, 2013)
Defendant P...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
HAN KIM, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 09-648 (RWR)
)
DEMOCRAT...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiffs, who include the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP, the Fayette County Branch of the NAACP, and individuals who are African-American registered voters residing in Fayette County, claim that Fayette County’s at-large method of electing members to the Fayette County Board of Commissioners (“BOC”) and Board of Education (“BOE”) violates § 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 10-256-08 (RMC)
)
NOE MACHADO-ERAZO, )
...
Views: 0
Page 84201
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LIBERTARIAN NATIONAL
COMMITTEE, INC.,
Civil Action No. 11-cv-562 (RLW)
Plaintiff,
v.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
*878
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this patent infringement suit, defendants seek threshold dismissal, arguing (i) that there is no indirect or willful infringement, as defendants lacked the requisite pre-suit knowledge of the patents in issue, and (ii) that because of the nature of the '362 patent’s claimed system, only the end computer user — here the consumer — can directly infringe this system clai...
Views: 0
RULING RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 36)
I. INTRODUCTION
This case is the fourth in a series of proceedings between the parties regarding the same underlying transaction and set of facts. The dispute concerns liability under a title insurance policy for real property. Plaintiff Bristol Heights Associates, LLC (“Bristol Heights”) brought this action against defendant Chicag...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARK DAMON HILDRETH,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1099 (JDB)
BARACK OBAMA et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In the instant action, Plaintiff Mark Damon Hi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
In this case, Plaintiff One Three Five, Inc. t/d/b/a Blush (“Plaintiff’), an adult entertainment establishment in downtown Pittsburgh featuring nude, erotic dancing, alleges that its federal constitutional rights to freedom of speech, procedural due process and equal protection of the laws and its Pennsylvania constitutional right to freedom of speech have bee...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a case of first impression. Maeve and Jefflee Hermida (collectively, the “Hermidas”) brought this suit for declaratory judgment against their former landlord, ASN Reading LLC d/b/a Arch-stone Reading (“Archstone”) and fourteen *302other affiliated entities. The Hermidas sent a pre-suit demand letter on their behalf and on that of the putative class a...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING LAW OFFICE OF STABINSKI & FUNT, P.A.’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL AND STRIKING NOTICE AND CLAIM OF ATTORNEY’S CHARGING LIEN
This matter is before the Court on Stabinski & Funt, P.A.’s (“Stabinski”) Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Plaintiff [D.E. 112] and Verified Notice and Claim of Attorney’s Charging Lien, [D.E. 113], filed April 25 and 26, 2013. Plaintiff American Federati...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White’s Report of Magistrate Judge (“Report”) [ECF No. 38], entered May 17, 2013. On September 19, 2012, Plaintiff, Calvin Kingcade (“Kingcade”), filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983 (“Complaint”) [ECF No. 1] alleging claims of retaliation, endangerment, and lack of adequate medical treatmen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On March 11, 2013, Plaintiff Jason Reed initiated this action by filing a complaint against Defendants Chambersburg Area School District, Chambersburg Area School District Foundation, Joseph Padasak, and Jill McCollum, asserting a number of claims arising out of the deterioration of the relationship between Plaintiff, his after-school dance program, and the school district. (Doc. No....
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Sonia Wright, brought this action against Defendants for various claims arising out of her employment and termination, including sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA), Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.2101 et seq. Defendant AutoZoners, LLC (AutoZ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PAUL DEPPENBROOK, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-60...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
GEORGE H. ARCHIBALD, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 1...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
By letter dated May 24, 2013, Defendants Standard Chartered Bank Interna*636tional (Americas) Ltd. (“SCBI”) sought a pre-motion conference to enforce this Court’s May 18, 2012 order, 863 F.Supp.2d 346 (S.D.N.Y.2012) (the “May 18 Order”) compelling Plaintiff Ricardo Rodriguez Caso (“Caso”) to arbitrate his claims against SCBI on an individual basis. (Dkt. No. 70.) Caso respond...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint of Intervenor Rodney Tow for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 77.) For the reasons that follow, the Court DENIES the Defendants’ Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
World Projects International, Inc. (“WPI”) and World Projects Services International, Inc. (“WPSI”) are Texas Corporations. (Am. Compl. ¶...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se plaintiff Araya Henok brings this action against Chase Home Finance, LLC (“Chase”) and Fannie Mae,1 challenging the legality of the foreclosure on a property he owned on C Street S.E. in Washington, D.C. (“the property”). Henok moves for partial summary judgment against Chase on his claim under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”), 12 U.S.C. § 2...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is the Motion for Attorney Fees [Dkt. # 16] of defendant Valmont Industries, Inc. (“Valmont”) and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge T. Lane Wilson [Dkt. # 31] on the motion. Magistrate Judge Wilson recommended that Valmont be awarded $12,586.12 in attorney fees. [Dkt. # 31 at 12]. Plaintiff, Rodney Henry Rice, Jr. (“Rice”), filed an Objection t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. Criminal No. 96-319-02 (CKK)
Civil Action No. 00-2194 (CKK)
RALPH T. WILSON,
Defendant.
MEMORAND...
Views: 0
Page 84633
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Electrolux Home Products, Inc. manufactured a clothes dryer that caught on fire causing considerable damage to the home of Kelly Slabach, subrogee in this action, and her husband. State Farm Fire & Casualty insured the Slabach’s home, paid their insurance claim and then sued Electrolux to recover the amount paid on the Slabach’s behalf. State Farm asserts claims of s...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court are the October 1, 2012 Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Regina Fisher (“Fisher”), Robert Lipscomb (“Lipscomb”), and LaQuita Sullivan (“Sullivan”) (collectively, the “MHA Defendants”); the November 29, 2012 Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Lynn Grosso (“Grosso”), Gregory Bernard King (“King”), and Carlos Os...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
This suit arises from an insurance premium .financing scheme entered into by Plaintiff Ronald H. Van Den Heuvel. Van Den Heuvel filed this action pro se in Brown County Circuit Court in Wisconsin. On April 4, 2012, Defendants removed the matter from the state court. Jurisdiction was asserted under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) based upon diversity of citizensh...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Document *679No. 97) and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 101). Having considered the motions, submissions, and applicable law, the Court finds that the motions should be granted.
I. BACKGROUND
This personal injury action arises from an auto-pedestrian accident that occurred at a military base in Iraq during...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I. INTRODUCTION
This action is before the Court on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. After a bench trial, this Court rejected Defendant United Technologies Corporation’s assertion of a statute of limitations defense and found it liable on the United States’ claims arising under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTIONS TO THEIR RESPECTIVE PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORTS AND GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE
On September 15, 2011, the Government filed a sixteen count Indictment against Defendants Executive Recycling, Inc., Brandon Richter, and Tor Olson. (ECF No. 1.) After a lengthy and hard fought jury trial, on December 21, 2012, Executive Recycling and B...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are two motions: (1) The City of Grand Island’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or, alternatively, for failure to state a claim; and (2) Nebraska Public Power District’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or, alternatively, for failure to state a claim. For the reasons that follow, the motions to dismiss for lack of persona...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on a Motion to Compel Arbitration submitted by the Defendants, Quest Diagnostics, Inc. and AmeriPath, Inc.1 Plaintiffs Erin Beery, Heather Traeger, and Sandy Cooper have filed an Amended Complaint which alleges that Defendants subjected female employees to a systematic pattern and practice of pay and promotion discrimination. These named Plain...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kevin M. Lynn sued Monarch Recovery Management, Inc. (“Monarch”) for violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act1 (the “TCPA”), the Maryland Telephone Consumer Protection Act2 (the “MDTCPA”), and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act3 (the “FDCPA”). On March 25, 2013, 2013 WL 1247815, the Court granted in part and denied in part the parties’ cross motions for summary judgm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion to Compel Arbitration (doc. 71) filed April 1, 2013 by Defendants Travelocity.com LP and Sabre Holdings Corporation1 (the “Traveloeity Defendants” or collectively “Travelocity”). Having considered the Motion and the filings in this case, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED.
I.
BACKGROUND
This consolidated proceeding...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
VIRGINIA VIRTS,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-320 (JDB)
THE PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA,
and
RITE AID CORPORATION LONG
TERM DISABILITY PLAN,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE On June 10, 2013, a motion was filed by the Defendant, Maurice Louis Kirby (“Mr. Kirby”),- who is pro se, requesting that the court reduce his sentence “as a result of movant’s post rehabilitation [sic] conduct.” (Doc. 546 at 2.) Although the defendant titles his motion a “Motion for Reconsideration: Fair Sentencing Act” and references 18 U.S.C. § 3...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
I. Factual Background
The Court draws the following “uncontested material facts,”1 verbatim, from the bankruptcy court’s Opinion and Order (“0 & 0”) dated September 8, 2011, (Docket No. 6-13 at pp. 8-10):
Appellant Aida Luz Chico-Peña (“Ms. Chico”) and the decedent Mr. Felix Gonzalez-Figueroa (“Mr. Gonzalez”) were in a relationship in which they procreated five (5)...
Views: 0
DECISION & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This pro se action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred by this Court to the Hon. Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c).
In his May 14, 2013 Report-Recommendation and Order, Magistrate Judge Hummel recommends that Plaintiffs motion for summary judgemen...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JAMES GAMBRELL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 11-626 (BJR)
v.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ISAAC FULWOOD, JR., Chairman of the
United States Parol...
Views: 0
OPINION
The parties in this patent case dispute which was the first to purify and isolate a protein called TBP-II. Working independently in two different countries, Yeda and Abbott filed patent applications just nine days apart in 1989. Twenty-four years later, litigation continues over which has priority to *99the United States patent for the protein, with each party having won and lost battles ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a civil forfeiture action involving money seized by the United States of America (the “Government”) from three bank accounts which had been held in the name of Leading Edge Group Holdings, LLC (“Leading Edge”),1 a company owned by Allen Hilly. The seized money, which is named as the Defendant in this in rem action, will hereinafter be referred to as the “Leading Edge accounts” or ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Shana Perry, Daryl Quiney and Damon Harper brought suit against their former employer, Defendant AutoZoners, LLC (“Autozone”)1 for alleged injuries suffered during their employment. Autozone filed two motions for summary judgment. First, Autozone moved for *604summary judgment against Quiney and Harper on their joint claims for racial discrimination and ret...
Views: 2
ORDER
Plaintiff Rodney Waldoch (“Waldoch”) brought this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1466 (2006), against Defendant Medtronic, Inc. (“Medtronic”), his former employer, seeking recovery of Long Term Disability (“LTD”) benefits under an employee benefit plan. Now before the Court are the parties’ Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment.
I. BACKGRO...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Pending before the Court is Defendant’s timely filed Motion for Judgment of Acquittal under Fed.R.Crim.P. 29(c) (Docket No. 76), to which the United States filed a response (Docket No. 80) and Defendant a reply (Docket No. 81). In the motion, Defendant argues that the Court should set aside the guilty verdict found by the jury with respect to each of three counts-misbehavior in or so ...
Views: 1
OPINION This action is a trademark dispute between Kate Spade LLC and Saturdays Surf LLC. Kate Spade sues Saturdays Surf for a declaratory judgment that the name of Kate Spade’s new brand, “Kate Spade Saturday,” does not infringe Saturdays Surfs mark, “Saturdays Surf NYC,” or any other “Saturday”-related mark claimed by Saturdays Surf. Saturdays Surf counterclaims for trademark infringement. Fir...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Pending before the court is a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 87), and brief in support, (ECF No. 88), filed by plaintiff Geneva College (“Geneva”), and the response in opposition, (ECF No. 89), filed by defendants Kathleen Sebelius, Hilda Solis, Timothy Geithner, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), the United Sta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court are: (1) the defendants’ motion for summary judgment; (2) the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment; and (3) the defendants’ motion to strike certain exhibits and factual assertions. For the reasons explained below, we deny the parties’ motions.
BACKGROUND
A. The Co-Branding Agreement (“CBA”)
Plaintiffs Balmoral Racing Club, Inc. (“Balmoral”) and Maywood ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS [# 9]
I. INTRODUCTION
Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. The parties had oral arguments on June 10, 2013. For the reasons that follow, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
II. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs filed this action on August 6, 2012. This case arises from a state-law claim of alleged Tortious In...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Chicago Teachers Union, Local No. 1 (“Union”) and several individual teachers (“the individual plaintiffs”) have filed suit against the Board of Education of the City of Chicago (“Board”), claiming that Board violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII,” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17) when it instituted a layoff plan that resulted in termination o...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
SCOTT A. McNAMARA, M.D., )
)
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY...............................................919
II. RELEVANT FACTS.....................................................920
III. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARDS....................................923
TV. ANALYSIS..............................................................924
A. Se...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on memorandum and recommendation (“M & R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. (DE 32), recommending this court allow defendants’ partial motion to dismiss (DE 13). Plaintiff, appearing pro se, responded to the motion to dismiss and objected to the M & R. Defendants filed a memorandum in support of the M & R, to which plaintiff responded. T...
Views: 0
Page 85338
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LANDMARK HEALTH SOLUTIONS, LLC, :
:
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, : Civil Action No.: 11cv456
:
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff Rodney Walker filed this action against his former employer, the Town of Hennessey (“Hennessey”), asserting procedural and substantive due process claims and a First Amendment retaliation claim. Defendant Hennessey has filed a motion for summary judgment, which is appropriate only “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is enti...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs John R. Graybill and Patricia Goff-Graybill (the “Graybills”) filed this lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank raising eight claims stemming from Wells Fargo’s actions regarding their mortgage loan, their 2006 refinancing of it, their 2009 attempts to modify the loan under the Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”), and the fo...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion for Bill of Costs [D.E. 56], which was previously referred, to the Honorable Barry S. Seltzer for a Report and Recommendation. See D.E. 58. On May 20, 2013, Judge Seltzer issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that Defendant’s motion be granted in part and denied in part. D.E. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case comes before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for judgment on the administrative record [15,16].
I. Background
In this action, Plaintiff Marge Clark seeks to recover insurance benefits under an insurance policy issued to Citigroup N.A. by Defendant Life Insurance Company of North America (“LINA”). The policy provides for accidental death and dismemberment benefits under a...
Views: 0
Page 85549
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On May 17, 2010, plaintiffs Centro de la Comunidad Hispana de Locust Valley (“Centro”) and The Workplace Project, two organizations that advocate on behalf of immigrant workers and day laborers commenced this action alleging that the Town of Oyster Bay (“The Town”) and its Town Supervisor John Venditto violated their free speech, due process, and equal protection rights thr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Janet Grapentine filed suit against defendant Pawtucket Credit Union (“PCU”) in response to the impending foreclosure on her home. (ECF No. 2.) Ms. Grapentine contends that the threatened foreclosure, conducted pursuant to R.I. General Laws § 34-11-22, violates her right to due process because of the lack of a judicial hearing. Id. at 5. The mortgage deed foreclosu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court are Defendants’ Frye, Joseph and Warden’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December 13, 2012, and Defendant Dallas County’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December 21, 2012. The court has reviewed and considered the motions, combined response, replies, the summary judgment evidence, and the applicable law. For the reasons that follow, Defendan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Privileged information can be communicated in myriad ways: orally, in writing, by email, with text messages, or even through social media. This opinion addresses the circumstances under which information contained in a database may be protected from disclosure by either the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine.
Background
The plaintiffs allege that their...
Views: 0
Page 85649
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff initiated this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to provide relief to a class of current and former employees of defendant. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that defendant subjected the class members to a sexually hostile work environment be...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM — REPORT ON BELLWETHER TRIAL
After determining a “Bellwether” Trial would be the best way to achieve a resolution of numerous copyright infringement complaints filed in this district by Plaintiff Malibu Media, LLC (“Malibu”), expedited pretrial proceedings resulted in a non-jury trial on June 10, 2013. Malibu, a producer of adult cinemas, alleged Defendants had downloaded its movies us...
Views: 0
*651
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Eastboro Foundation and James Bernath (collectively, “Bernath”) bring this diversity action against defendants Abraham Penzer and Joshua Rothenberg, seeking $150,000 in damages resulting from an unsuccessful real estate transaction among the parties. (Dkt. No. 1: Compl.) Presently before the Court is Penzer’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court for disposition is the defendants’ motion to dismiss portions of plaintiffs complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition.
Background
Plaintiff served as the head varsity football coach for the Defendant Dallas School District for twenty-eight years beginning in 1984. (Doc. 1...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Elie Harfouche, a concert promoter, has brought an action for breach of *768contract, among other claims, against a number of defendants, including Defendant Haifa Wehbe, who is a singer and performer based in Lebanon. Defendant Wehbe has brought this Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), arguing that this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over her because she has...
Views: 0
Page 85740
*527MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Jim Fares (“Fares”) alleges that Peter Lankau, Douglas Karp, Eric Liebler, William Maichle, Neil Milano, Geoffrey Raker, Frank Sica, Zubeen Shroff, David Azad, John Groom, Galen Partners V, L.P., Galen Partners International V, L.P., Tailwind Capital Partners LP, Tailwind Holdings (Cayman), L.P., Tailwind Management, L.P., Tailwind Capital Partners...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On April 11, 2011, plaintiff Walker Digital, LLC (“plaintiff’) filed Civ. No. 11-313 against ten defendants, including eBay, Inc. (“eBay”), for allegedly infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 7,831,470 (“the '470 patent”) and 7,827,056 (“the '056 patent”). (Civ. No. 11-313, D.I. 1) Currently before the court in Civ. No. 11-313 is defendants Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”), Za...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Now before the Court is Defendant Republic Airlines, Inc.’s (“Republic”) motion for summary judgment [DE 56-58] seeking to have judgment entered in its favor on Plaintiff Anthony Felice’s complaint alleging Republic committed sex and race discrimination in violation of Title VII by forcing his resignation1 [DE 1], Plaintiff Anthony Felice (“Felice”), by counsel, respo...
Views: 0
RULING RE: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AS TO MOTION FOR JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULES 55(c) and 60(b) (Doc. No. 164)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Peter Cook (“Cook”), Thea Duell (“Duell”), and Aleksandar Milosavlievic-Cook (“Milosavlievic-Cook”) brought suit, both individually and derivatively on behalf of Maya’s Meals, LLC, against defendants Maya Toidze, Alexandre Ivankine (“Ivankine”), Tim Toidze, a...
Views: 0
RULING RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 41) AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 53)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Juno N. Dina (“Dina”) brings this suit against defendant Cuda & Associates (“Cuda”) for violations of the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e (“FDCPA”), the Connecticut Creditor’s Collection Practices Act, Conn. Gen.Stat....
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Robert Dodson sues defendant Strategic Restaurants Acquisition Company II, LLC d/b/a Burger King # 099371 alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and related California statutes. Plaintiff now moves to strike certain affirmative defenses raised in defendant’s answer. This matter was originally set for hearing on June 17, 2013, but has been decided based on the...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter came before the Court on June 10, 2013 for a hearing on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docs. 68-70),1 Plaintiffs Response (Doc. 74), Defen*1248dant’s Reply (Doc. 77), and the parties’ supplemental briefing (Docs. 98-100); Plaintiffs Motion to Strike as to Jones (Docs. 75, 76), Defendant’s Response (Doc. 79) and Plaintiffs Reply (Doc. 86); and Defendant’s Motion to Stri...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Scott J. Hartman has filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security that denied his current applications for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI).1 Hartman applied for DIB and SSI on August 12, 2011, alleging that he was disabled as of January...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
On November 28, 2011, Plaintiffs Heather Lindsey (“Lindsey”) and Geremy K. Lopez, individually and as guardians ad litem for RFL,. their minor daughter, (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), filed this action against Kathryn S. Matayoshi in her official capacity as State Superintendent, Department of Education (“Matayoshi”); Kanu O ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart issued Findings and Recommendation (# 45) on March 19, 2013, in which she recommends the Court grant Plaintiffs’ Motion (#4) to Remand and strike Defendants’ Motion (# 22) to Dismiss and Motion (# 6) to Change or Transfer Venue. Defendant filed timely Objections (# 47) to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff brings this case under Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. § 51, and the Locomotive Inspection Act [LIA], 49 U.S.C.A. § 20701. Plaintiff Thomas McCool alleges while employed as a repair mechanic with defendant Norfolk Southern Railway Company (Norfolk Southern), he was subjected to a close range train horn blast for approximately two to four seconds. Plaintiff alleg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Deborah Brangman brings suit against Defendants AstraZeneca LP and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP (“AstraZeneca”). Brangman alleges that AstraZeneca subjected her to disparate treatment on the basis of her race and gender in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VH’’), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Count I), and the Delaware Discrimination Employment ...
Views: 0
Page 85950
OPINION
Plaintiff Anita Trayling filed this discrimination case against Defendant County of St. Joseph (the county), her former employer; and Defendant St. Joseph County Employers Chapter of Local # 2955, an affiliate of Council 25, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employers International Union, AFL-CIO (AFSCME), the collective bargaining agent for county employees. Now pendin...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are the following motions:
1. ION’s Partial Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. No. 565);
2. ION’s Rule 59 Motion for New Trial on Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 (Doc. No. 550);
3. ION’s Request for Findings and Conclusions on Enablement and, Alternatively, Motion for New Trial (Doc. No. 552);
4. ION’s Renewed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Mu’min Rahim (“plaintiff’), an inmate at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center, Smyrna, Delaware, filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 19831 alleging deprivation of his right to due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and was granted leave to proceed without prepayment of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BERNICE ALSTON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1038 (JEB)
JACOB J. LEW, SECRETARY OF THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
TREASURY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 2011, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JAMES BOLAND, as Trustee of, and on
behalf of, the Bricklayers & Trowel Trades
International Pension Fund, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 11-2274 (JEB)
THERMAL SPECIALTIES, INC., and
THERMAL SPECIALTIES
ACQUI...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is a Motion to Amend or Alter Judgment Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) (Doc. 16) filed by the Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”). The court has considered the arguments made in this document, as well as those made in the Response (Doc. 18) filed by the Plaintiff, F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on cross motions for partial summary judgment, arising from a dispute over the interpretation of a homeowner’s insurance policy. The parties to this case include homeowners Jane Emsbo and Jorgen Emsbo, Plaintiffs, and Defendant Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company. Following the rejection of their insurance claim for water and mold damage, the Ems...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Doc. No. 29). Based upon the court’s review of the record, the defendants’ motion to dismiss will be granted and the plaintiffs request for class certification will be dismissed as moot.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
By way of relevant backgro...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case arises from the general court-martial of Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, and involves issues with respect to public access to the court-martial proceedings. Pretrial proceedings in the court-martial began in March 2012, pursuant to Article 39(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (“UCMJ”), codified in 10 U.S.C. ch. 47. The bench trial began on June 3, 201...
Views: 0
ORDER
George Bougopoulos sued Altria Group, Inc. (“Altria”), Philip Morris USA Inc. (“Philip Morris”), and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Inc. (“R.J. Reynolds”), alleging claims for products liability; negligence; negligent misrepresentation; fraudulent misrepresentation; violation of New Hampshire’s Consumer Protection Act, RSA 358-A:2; and violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Org...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant Howmedica Osteonics Corp.’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Dkt. 31), Defendant Howmedica Osteonics Corp.’s Notice of Supplemental Authority • (Dkt. 32), and Plaintiff -Paul E. Lederman’s Response in Opposition (Dkt. 33). The Court, having reviewed the motion, response, supplemental authority, and being otherwise advised in the premises...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER RE: ATTORNEY’S FEES & COSTS
The plaintiff TruGreen Companies, L.L.C. (“TruGreen”) commenced the above-captioned action on February 8, 2006, alleging a number of claims against the defendants, including a number of former TruGreen employees, for breach of employment contracts, tortious interference with contract and with economic relationships, and unfair competition.1 A...
Views: 1
Page 86238
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the court is the Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 169) filed by the *1207only remaining Defendants in this case, Wendy Garcia, Lori Holmes, Veronica Kasprzak, Amy Reed, and Charlene Sansone, all current or former employees of the State of Utah’s Division of Child and Family Services (“DCFS” ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Abel Mendoza alleges that his former employer, Defendant City of Palacios (the City), violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) when he was forced to resign because of a perceived disability — hypertension. In its motion- for summary judgment, the City argues that Mendoza’s claims fail because *870he do...
Views: 0
ORDER This is one in a series of suits brought on behalf of a severely handicapped child. The appellants are the child’s parents, Joanne and Glenn Horen. Pending is a motion by the defendant Board of Education of the City of Toledo Public Schools (TPS) for judgment on the pleadings. (Doc. 6). For the reasons that follow, I grant the motion. Discussion In this suit the parents appeal, pursuant to t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Jose Celestino Guillen-Rivas (“Defendant” or “Guillen-Rivas”), is charged with three counts in a seventeen-count indictment against Defendant and nine co-defendants. Defendant moves this Court to sever his trial from that of the other defendants, arguing that judicial economy would not be well served by consolidating trials because the crimes with which he and his co-defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff, William Albert, Jr. (“plaintiff’), a resident of New Jersey, brings a three-count Complaint against F/V Misty Dawn, Inc. as owner of the Fishing Vessel Misty Dawn (“defendant”). Defendant is a New Jersey corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey. Plaintiff alleges: 1) Negligence, 2) Unseaworthiness and 3) Maintenance and Cure.
I. Factual Backgrou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Damien Gouse has filed a Motion to Dismiss under the Interstate Agreement of Detainers (“IAD”) 18 U.S.C. App. 2 § 2 on the grounds that the federal government’s use of the writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum (“writ”) resulted in three violations of the IAD Art. IV(a) and the government’s attempt to avoid the LAD led to a further violation of the anti-shuttling provisions c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before this Court is Defendant Daniel Santiago’s Motion to Suppress (ECF No. 14) any and all evidence seized and statements given as a result of his arrest on November 1, 2012 including both the evidence seized from his person as well as the evidence seized from his residence. Mr. Santiago has moved to suppress this evidence as fruit of the poisonous tree stemming from searche...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a putative class action brought by Plaintiffs Arley and Valerie Leghorn (“Plaintiffs”) against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“WFB”), Wells Fargo Insurance, Inc. (“WFI”) (WFB and WFI are referred to collectively as “Wells Fargo”), QBE Insurance Corporation (“QBEC”), and QBE First Insurance Agency, Inc. (“QBEF”) (QBEC and ...
Views: 0
Order
Pending before the court is a motion to dismiss filed by defendant, Citimortgage, Inc. (“CMI”). Dkt. 6. Plaintiff Mario Jose Ortiz has requested that the court deny the motion or, alternatively, grant him leave to amend. Dkt. 8. Having considered the motion, responsive briefing, and applicable law, the court is of the opinion that CMI’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. 6) should be GRANTED IN PART A...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The above referenced action seeks injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment that Plaintiff DeNiece Design LLC’s (“DeNiece’s”) products have not infringed and do not infringe United States Patent 7,255,299 (the “'299 patent”) for a fabric storage panel, purportedly owned by Defendant Elaine Braun (“Braun”), or that the patent is invalid, or that Braun is barred from enforcin...
Views: 0
Page 86502
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Christopher J. Ware (“plaintiff’), who proceeds pro se, filed this lawsuit alleging violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 19831 and raising supplemental state claims. Presently before the court is defendants’ mo*740tion to dismiss the complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment and plaintiffs cross-motion for summar...
Views: 0
Page 86504
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner Tyrone Guy (“petitioner”) is a Delaware inmate in custody at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Wilmington, Delaware. Presently before the court is petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.I. 1) For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUN...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES [DOC. 28] WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to strike Defendant’s affirmative defenses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f). (Mot. [Doc. 28].) Defendants oppose. (Opp’n [Doc. 31].) The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7.1(d.l). For the r...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. Criminal No. 12-65 (CKK)
PAUL DAVID HITE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(June 20, 2013)
Presently before the Cour...
Views: 0
Page 86690
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WILLARD T. KING, JR.,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-319 (CKK)
v.
ERIC HIMPTON HOLDER, JR., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(J...
Views: 1
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR PREJUDGMENT REMEDY The plaintiff, Benjamin Roberts (“Roberts” or “the plaintiff’), brought this action against his former employer, Triplanet Partners LLC (“TriPlanet”), and TriPlanet’s managing members, Sophien Bennaceur (“Sophien”) and Imed Bennaceur (“Imed”) (collectively, “the defendants”), alleging, inter alia, breach of contract and violations of the C...
Views: 0
ENTRY ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs, Mary Rihm and Recho Rowell, filed this civil action against the Han*846cock County Public Library (“Library”), and Dianne Osborne and Jean Medley, individually and in their official capacities, among others, alleging violations of their constitutional and state rights. The Library and Osborne (together, “Defendants”), filed a motion to dismiss al...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 44] filed by the plaintiffs, Annette Salomon and Edward Salomon, on January 31, 2013, the Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 47] filed by the defendant, Cincinnati Insurance Company, on January 31, 2013, and the Motion to Strike [DE 50] filed by the plaintiffs on February 27, 2013. For the following reasons, the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On November 20, 2011, Plaintiff commenced this action for review of an August 22, 2011 administrative order issued by the New York State Education Department’s Office of State Review. The administrative order sustained, in part, the decision and order of an impartial hearing officer (“IHO”) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S....
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Presently before the Court is Defendant, Promotion In Motion, Inc.’s [hereinafter the Defendant], Motion to Dismiss. Docket No. 9. The parties appeared telephonically for hearing on March 26, 2013. After listening to the parties’ arguments, the Court took the matters under consideration and now enters the following.
I. BACKGROUND
At this early stage of the c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on two motions by the Defendants against the Plaintiffs, KFC Corporation and KFC U.S. Properties, Inc. (collectively “KFCC”), a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (DN 18), and a motion to transfer the action to the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota (“District of Minnesota”) pursua...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Pending before the court is the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 11), to which the plaintiff has filed a response (Docket No. 27). Also before the court is the Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 24),1 to which the defendants have filed a response (Docket No. 31). For the reasons discussed herein, the defendants’ motion will be granted, while ...
Views: 1
Page 86788
ORDER ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS
After a four-day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Tyler Riley (together “Plaintiffs”) on his claim for disparate treatment and in favor of Defendant Western Trading Company, Inc. (“Defendant”) on the claims of failure to accommodate and failure to maintain separate medical records. (ECF No. 148-7.) Th...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Christopher Welsh brought this action against his former employer Automatic Data Processing, Inc. (“ADP”)1 and his former supervisor at ADP, Kevin Ryan. Welsh alleges that Defendants discriminated against him on the basis of his disability and retaliated against him for engaging in protected activity in violation of ...
Views: 1
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. #25) AND TERMINATING THIS CASE
Now before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment brought by Defen*658dants Kettering Health Network (“Kettering”) and Grandview Medical Center (“Grandview”). (Doc. # 25.) This motion is now fully briefed and ripe for decision.
This matter arises out of the employment and subsequent terminati...
Views: 0
Page 86871
*918ORDER The plaintiff filed this action for review of the final decision of the Commissioner for Social Security pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3). The Magistrate Judge presides over this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) having received the written consent of both parties. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 73; (Does. 11, 14). The final decision of the Commissioner is not “supported by ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ post-trial motions. Having considered the parties’ written submissions, the Court: (1) DENIES Defendant Digital River, Inc.’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) (Dkt. No. 540); (2) DENIES National Leisure Group, Inc.’s and World Travel Holdings, Inc.’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matte...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises from an accident involving a Bumbo Baby Seat, an infant seat manufactured by Defendant Bumbo International Trust and sold by Defendant Target Corporation. Plaintiffs Theresa and William Hess bring a number of product liability claims, alleging that a Bumbo Baby Seat caused serious injury to their infant child. Bumbo, a South African entity, filed a motion t...
Views: 0
Page 87003
ORDER
The court has reviewed for clear error the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon, dated and filed February 25, 2013, to which no objections have been received. Judge Scanlon has comprehensively surveyed the applicable law and applied it to the facts. The Report and Recommendation is adopted. The individual defendant Roxana Valenzuela is dismissed from the action wi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Endocare, Inc. (“Plaintiff’) brought the present diversity action requesting judgment in exequatur against Technologias Urológicas, Inc. (“Defendant”). (Docket No. 1 ¶ 1.) Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Docket No. 43.) Plaintiff opposed the motion. (Docket No. 48.) After reviewing these submissions and the pertinent law, the ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This diversity action for breach of contract, conversion, and an accounting was initially filed on March 22, 2012. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) An Amended Complaint was filed on February 11, 2013. (Am. Compl., ECF No. 26.)1 Plaintiff Madeleine, LLC (“Madeleine”) sues Alan I. Casden for amounts it claims are due and owing under a promissory note dated March 11, 2002 (the “Promissory Note...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant Ernesto Morales-Castro’s (“Morales”) motion to dismiss the indictment for violation of the Speedy Trial Act. (Docket No. 85.) After reviewing defendant Morales’ motion, the government’s response, (Docket No. 87), and defendant Morales’ reply, (Docket No. 89), the Court DENIES defendant Morales’ motion.
DISCUSSION
I. Background
The Court declines ...
Views: 0
ORDER In an order filed July 12, 2010, pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiffs were awarded a variety of sanctions against the defendant Arab Bank for its failure to comply with its obligations to produce discovery. The sanctions included “attorneys’ fees and costs incurred as a result of the defendant’s production failures and the resulting sanctions litigati...
Views: 0
Page 87047
MEMORANDUM I. Introduction Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Motion For Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 30), and the Respondent’s Cross Motion For Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 47). For the reasons set forth herein, Petitioner’s Motion For Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 30) is DENIED, and the Respondent’s Cross Motion For Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 47) is GRAN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Joseph Weigel sued the State of Maryland and Armistead Homes Corporation (“Armistead”) for declaratory and injunctive relief. ECF No. 1. On September 12, 2012, Weigel moved for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) and preliminary injunction. ECF Nos. 2, 3. On October 15, 2012, Weigel and others1 (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) filed an amended, class action complaint. ECF No....
Views: 0
Page 87108
ORDER AND NOW, this 24th day of May, 2013, upon careful and independent consideration of Plaintiff Monique Reese’s Brief and Statement of Issues in Support of Request for Review, Defendant’s response thereto, and Reese’s reply, and after careful review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy R. Rice, to which no objections have been filed,2 it is ORDERED: 1. Th...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
)
GARY CHARLES BRESTLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case comes before the Court on the following:
1. The Motion to Dismiss Count I of Plaintiffs Complaint and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Defendants Captain Katanna’s, Inc. and Pineda Inn Bar & Grill, Inc. (Doc. No. 9, filed Apr. 17, 2013); and
2. The Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiff Brittany Glass (Doc. No. 11, filed May 1, 2013).
Introduction
On...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff seeks conditional certification of a class of current and former mortgage underwriters employed by defendant U.S. Bank. Defendant has requested that the court seal every single page of most of the substantive exhibits that plaintiff has submitted in support of the conditional certification motion.1 For the reasons that follow, plaintiffs conditional certification motion will be ...
Views: 0
Page 87216
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 77, 80). The case concerns an Algerian citizen’s claims against various former gov*907ernment officials concerning alleged abuse, mistreatment, and torture committed by the United States military during Plaintiffs detention in multiple countries. Defendants’ motions present three issues before ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Mark Lublin (“Plaintiff’)1 commenced this diversity action2 against American Financial Group, Inc., American Spirit Insurance Company, Great American Spirit Insurance Company, Great American Insurance Company, Great American Insurance Companies, Great American Insurance Group, and Great American Insurance Specialty Auto Group (“Defendants”) for compensatory and punitive damages and att...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER REJECTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
Before the court today is Plaintiff Jeffrey Reynolds’s objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) that his request for attorney’s fees be denied. (ECF No. 23.) For the reasons discussed below, this court will reject that recommendation and award plaintiffs counsel the fees...
Views: 0
ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF DEFENDANTS VEGA AND COY; (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS AND/ OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF DEFENDANT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; AND (3) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S RULE 56(d) MOTION FOR DISCOVERY
On May 31, 2013, the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter was initiated by Plaintiff, C.H., and her parents, W.H. and T.H., individually and on C.H.’s behalf, pursuant to 20 U.S.C.A. § 1415(i)(2) and 34 C.F.R. § 300.512(2002), as an appeal from an administrative order, entered on June 30, 2011, from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office for Dispute Resolution, finding that the defendant, Schuylkill Valley School District, was ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
EDITH AIKENS, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-553 (RMC...
Views: 0
Page 87315
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court upon Defendant American Express Bank, FSB’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Industrial Park Development Corporation’s (“Plaintiff’) Amended Complaint, filed on February 26, 2013 (“Motion to Dismiss”) (Doc. 36). On March 12, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Memorandum in opposition (“Opposition”) (Doc. 45). On May 16, 2013, the Court held a hearing on Def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is defendant Earldy Stephenson’s Motion [199] to Further Reduce Sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706, Motion [215] to Reduce Sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 750, and Motion [225] for Hearing on defendant’s Motions to Reduce Sentence. Upon consideration of defendant’s motions [199, 215] to Reduce Sentence, the...
Views: 0
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Kevin Morgan’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs claims against him under Count I of the Amended Complaint. (Doe. 273). For the reasons stated below, the Motion is granted. In addition, the Court herein clarifies the current status of Count III of the First Amended Complaint.
Legal Standard
Summary judgment should be grante...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
SCOTT A. McNAMARA, M.D., )
)
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on two motions for Clarification and Reconsideration [Docket Nos. 234, 294] filed by Plaintiff Tecnomatic, S.P.A. (“Tecnomatic”) and a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket No. 290] filed by Defendants Remy Inc., Remy International, Inc., Del-co Remy Mexico, S.R.L. De C.V., and Remy Componentes S. De R.L. De C.V. (“Remy”). For the reasons detailed herei...
Views: 0
ORDER
This action is before the Court on the Motions for Summary Judgment and supporting documents filed pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by PlaintiffiCounterclaim Defendant SE Property Holdings, LLC (“SEPH”) (Docs. 63-65), Defendants Lester Boihem (“Boihem”) and Carroll Castille (“Castille”) (Docs. 86-88), Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs Paul Peed and Raymond Peed (...
Views: 1
*1069ORDER BACKGROUND Plaintiff Richard Chudacoff, M.D. (“Plaintiff’ or “Chudacoff’) is a physician who was appointed to the position of Assistant Professor with the University of Nevada School of Medicine, and granted staff privileges at the University Medical Center of Southern Nevada (“UMC”) in the obstetrics and gynecology department. Chudacoff was granted interim privileges on December 20, 20...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Southern Fidelity Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED.
Background
This insurance coverage dispute arises from damage to a house caused by the accumulation of guano1 in and below the *432attic, which had become a bat roosting colony.
Michael Marcelle owns property located at 7060-62 Boston Dri...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant Valero Energy Corporation’s (“VEC”) Motion for Summary Judgment,1 wherein VEC requests summary judgment in its favor dismissing Plaintiff Gerold David Burnette’s (“Plaintiff’) claims against VEC on the basis that it did not own or operate the Valero refining facility in Meraux, Louisiana. Having considered the motion, the memorandum, the oppositio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is Magistrate Judge T. Lane Wilson’s Report and Recommendation [Dkt. # 96] on the Motion for Attorney Fees [Dkt. # 79] filed by defendant Samson Resources Company (“Samson”). Samson sought $50,566.00 in attorney fees and $26,716.00 in costs associated with expert witness fees. Magistrate Judge Wilson recommended the motion be denied. Samson filed an objection t...
Views: 0
*317 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS GURBIR-TANU, LLC DIB/A MUMBAI CHOPSTIX AND SURINDER SINGH’S COUNTERCLAIM (#21) I. Introduction This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the counterclaim asserted by certain defendants. (# 21). The plaintiffs, Marcos Che Cucul, Luis Humberto Guardado, Carlos Tzi Beb, and Yovani Guardado, (collectiv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER On February 6, 2012, the Plaintiff Keith Barbour (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action pursuant to Social Security Act 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (“the Act”) challenging a final determination by the Defendant, Michael J. Astrue, the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”), that he was ineligible for Social Security disability benefits. The parties agree that...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 47], filed by Defendants Stiefel Laboratories, Inc., and Charles W. Stiefel. The Court held oral argument on May 31, 2013. Upon careful consideration of the record, the parties’ arguments, and the pertinent legal authorities, the Court finds that the Stiefel Defenda...
Views: 0
COURT FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
This is a suit by an excess insurance carrier against the primary insurer for common law bad faith and Florida statutory bad faith. Plaintiff Westchester Fire Insurance Company’s two-count complaint alleges that Defendant Mid-Continent Casualty Company acted in bad faith in failing to settle the underlying action. After conducting a bench trial, the Court pursuant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants Aldo Fernando Guerrero Clavijo, Rigoberto Muriel Torres, Pedro Jose Amado-Montilla, Wilson Orlando Serna-Hoyos, and Juan Carlos Gomez-Preciado move to suppress evidence derived from the interception of telephone calls by the Colombian National Police (“CNP”) on the ground that these communications were intercepted in violation of their due process...
Views: 1
Page 87543
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This is a habeas corpus proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). Petitioner Daniel Cormier was convicted by a jury in state court of one count of rape, one count of assault with intent to rape, and six counts of assault and battery in connection with attacks on two women.
*279Petitioner alleges four grounds for relief: (1) that ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion for default judgment. (Doc. 17.) In its Complaint, Plaintiff, HTS, Inc. (“HTS”), alleges claims against Defendants David Boley (“Boley”) and NuVision Systems (“NuVision”) for false designation of origin and trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), misappropriation of trade secrets under the Arizona Uniform Trade Secre...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM OPINION
On April 4, 2011, Anthony Ray Jenkins, David Jason Jenkins, Mable Ashley Jenkins and Alexis Leeann Jenkins, kidnapped Kevin Pennington. Without trial or due process, they sentenced him to a short period of detention in their truck followed by a beating on the mountains of Kingdom Come State Park. Ashley and Alexis claim they targeted Kevin Pennington because of his s...
Views: 0
FINAL ORDER OF CONTEMPT THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff, TracFone Wireless, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion to Reopen and for Contempt (the “Motion”) against Defendants GCA Electronics, LLC d/b/a Unlockcellular.com and Gunawan Lie (“Defendants”). (DE 69). On January 23, 2012, Plaintiff moved for an order to reopen this case with respect to Defendants based on their violations of the Fin...
Views: 0
ORDER Pending before the Court is Defendant Richard Keesee’s Motion Pursuant to 18 *999U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (“Motion”), seeking to modify his sentence under the amended United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines (“Guidelines”) for crack cocaine offenses. (Doc. No. 3764.) For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS the Motion and MODIFIES Keesee’s sentence to a term of 214 months’ imprisonm...
Views: 1
ORDER
In a letter dated January 23, 2013, certain plaintiffs request, pursuant to Rules 1, 54(b), and 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 6.3, that the prior decision in Litle v. Arab Bank (“Litle Opinion”), 507 F.Supp.2d 267 (E.D.N.Y.2007), dismissing those plaintiffs on timeliness grounds, be vacated in light of recently enacted amendments to the statute of limitation...
Views: 0
*1154ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 26). Also before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Strike Declarations (ECF No. 46). These matters were heard with oral argument on June 7, 2013. Charles M. Tebbutt, Brad J. Moore, and Elisabeth A. Holmes appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs. Debora K. Kristensen, Dustin E. Yea...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART, DENYING-IN-PART MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
Hewlett-Packard Co. (“Defendant” or “HP”) moves to dismiss Plaintiff David Elias’s Second Amended Complaint based on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b). The Court found the motion to be appropriate for disposition without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-l(b), and vacated the...
Views: 0
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT are Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 20), Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 25), and Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 55). These matters were heard with oral argument on June 19, 2013. Plaintiff was represented by Mary E. Schultz. Defendant was represented by Thaddeus J. O’Sullivan. The Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is the State of Rhode Island’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 7) David R. Dubois’s Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a *376Person in State Custody. (ECF No. 1.) In his Petition, Mr. Dubois sets forth two grounds for relief: ground one, the state trial court deprived Mr. Dubois of his Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process and conf...
Views: 0
ORDER
Three Motions to Dismiss are before the Court in this matter. Defendant Albert Cor*525mier Solutions, LLC (ACS) brings a Motion to Dismiss claims against it pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b). (Doc. 56.) Defendants The National Better Living Association (NBLA), Allied Health Benefits, Inc. (AHB), George E. Spalding, Jr., Susan Spalding, Timothy Siewert, G. Daniel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING
Before the court is a Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 2], filed by the defendants, Waterworks District No. 4 of Ward Four, Occie Norton, Kenny Cochran, and Ollie L. “Johnny” Johnson, III. The plaintiff, Keith Hardesty, filed an opposition [Doc. 5] and the defendants filed a reply [Doc. 6]. For the foregoing reasons, the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PA...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT SWIMWAYS CORPORATION’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS II AND III OF DEFENDANT SWIMWAYS CORPORATION’S COUNTERCLAIM Before this Court are: Defendant Swim-Ways Corporation’s (“SwimWays”) Motion to Dismiss (“the SwimWays Motion”), filed on March 18, 2013; [dkt. no. 12;] Plaintiff the Islander Group, Inc.’s (“TIG...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Town of Johnston has brought an action against several banks, mortgage companies, and mortgage servicers1 for *380damages and injunctive relief to redress alleged violations of Rhode Island statutory law. The Town asserts that the system Defendants established for mortgages and mortgage assignments made by their members violates the statutory requirement that all mortga...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court on two motions to dismiss [Docs. 16 & 19], and on Plaintiffs motion to consolidate a hearing on the preliminary injunction and a trial on the merits [Doc. 26]. For the reasons discussed below, the Government’s motion to dismiss [Doc. 16] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, Paragon System, Inc.’s motion to dismiss [Doc. 19] is GRANTED IN FULL, and Plaintiff...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
In re BLACK FARMERS DISCRIMINATION ) Misc. No. 08-0511 (PLF)
LITIGATION )
_________________________________________ )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and/or (b)(6) to dismiss this ERISA-based1 class action arising from the decision of a pension plan to purchase a single premium group annuity contract from a third party to settle approximately $7.4 billion of the plan’s pension liabilities to certain plan beneficiaries. For the reasons that follow, the court grants defen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER REGARDING COUNT 8
At the close of the Government’s casein-chief, Defendant Gerald Singer has moved for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29(a). For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion for purposes of Count 8.
Rule 29(a) states in part:
After the government closes its evidence or after the close of all the evi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Jay Hawkins brings this employment discrimination action against several Defendants, including Montgomery County, Maryland. Pending before the Court are three Motions: (1) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment; (2) Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint; and (3) Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions for Fabrication and Spoliation of Evidence. The Parties have ex...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER [DE 88]
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant, AKA Services, Inc.’s (“AKA”) Motion for Entry of Confidentiality Order [DE 88], which Defendants, Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. (“Ferguson”) and Line-Tec, Inc. (“Line-Tec”) have adopted [DEs 102, 103]. This matter was referred to the undersigned by United States District Judg...
Views: 0
ORDER
The court has before it for consideration plaintiffs “Claim for Declaratory Judgment” [15], plaintiffs “First Motion to Supplement and File Under Seal” [16], plaintiffs “Second Motion to Supplement the Record” [17], and defendants’ “Response to Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment” [18].
I. General Factual and Procedural Background
Plaintiff is a Georgia co...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS & FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58). After the Motion was fully briefed, the Court held oral argument on May 14, 2013. Having considered all of the parties’ written and oral submissions, the Court now GRANTS the Motion for reasons explained herein.
I. LEGAL STANDARD1
Generally, a party is entitle...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
SALAH N. OSSEIRAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 06-336 (RWR)
)
INTERNATI...
Views: 0
OPINION On March 5, 2013, Defendant Mitchell Eaton was indicted on six child pornography counts. (Dkt. No. 1.) On April 29, 2013, Defendant filed a motion to suppress statements he made to two Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) officers on February 22, 2012, in his bedroom at his home. (Dkt. No. 24.) Defendant argues that his statements must be suppressed because (1) they were obtained in vi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-856 (JEB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff John Foreman has filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket No. 37), to which defendant Five Star Food Service, Inc. (“Five Star”) filed a Response in opposition (Docket No. 38), and the plaintiffs filed a Reply (Docket No. 44). Five Star has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 30), to which Foreman and plaintiff Gary Runge filed a Response in oppositio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I
On March 21, 2013, the jury returned a verdict finding defendant police officers Shaun Grossweiler and Richard DeMartino (“defendants”) liable for the use of excessive force against plaintiff Anna Stanczyk during an altercation that began when they accused her of failing to clean up after her dog.1 The jury awarded Stanczyk $55,000 in compensatory damages and $2,000 in pu...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendant Continental Insurance Company’s motion for partial summary judgment on the bad faith claims under Louisiana Revised Statutes §§ 22:1892 and 22:1973 brought against them by Bollinger Shipyards, Inc., Bollinger Shipyards Lockport, L.L.C., and Halter-Bollinger Joint Venture, L.L.C. (collectively “Bollinger”) under La.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 22:1892 and La.R...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court upon Defendant AKA Services, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (DE 16 and 19); Defendant Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (DE 17) and Defendant Line-Tec, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Adopt Defendant AKA and Ferguson’s Motions to Dismiss (DE 25). The Court has carefully considered the Motions and is otherwise fully advised in the pr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Triple Canopy Ine.’s (“TCI”) Motion to Dismiss Relator Omar Badr’s Complaint and Intervenor United States of America’s Complaint for failure to state a claim. (Docs. 29, 31.) This case concerns allegations against a government contractor for fraudulent billing arising from the contractor’s duty to provide security at Unit...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCOVERY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................324 II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY...............................................324 III. RELEVANT FACTS.....................................................324 IV. DISCUSSION...........................................................326 A. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d).....
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
In this putative class action, lead plaintiffs Stanley Tolin and Jeffrey Stark (“Plaintiffs”) allege violations of New York law by defendants The McGraw Hill Companies, Inc. (“McGraw Hill”) and its wholly-owned subsidiary Standard & Poor’s Financial Services, LLC (“Standard and Poor’s”, and, collectively with McGraw Hill, “S & P”). Plaintiffs allege that S & P intentionally, rec...
Views: 0
ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiffs filed suit on September 6, 2012, seeking judicial review of the U.S. Forest Service’s Record of Decision and Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) *1176permitting implementation of the Cabin Gulch Project (“Project”) on the Helena National Forest (“Forest”). Plaintiffs also seek review of the Helena National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (“Forest Plan”).
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC CAUSATION TESTIMONY FROM PLAINTIFF’S EXPERTS
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Crane Co.’s Renewed Motion to *1219Exclude the Proposed Specific Causation Testimony from Plaintiffs Experts. Defendants York International Corporation, Honeywell, Inc., Goulds Pumps, Flowserve Corporation, and Sepco C...
Views: 0
ORDER (1) GRANTING DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF KYO-YA AND DEFENDANT AARON OKURA’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (2) GRANTING DEFENDANT KINCHUNG CHUNG’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court are: (1) Defendant/Counterelaim Plaintiff Kyo-ya Hotels *1142and Resorts, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO VACATE ORDERS DENYING CLASS CERTIFICATION AND LEAVE TO AMEND; DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs Sarah Perez, Michelle Laekney, Rachel Stewart, and Rachel Hardyek (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this putative class action against Defendants State Farm Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), Alstate Indemnity Company (...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
GEORGE S. BOLEY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 13-89 (R...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Deborah Brangman brings suit against Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (“MetLife”) for its adverse determination of her claim for long-term disability (LTD) benefits under the AstraZeneca Long Term Disability Insurance Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan is governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. MetLife moves for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs INVISTA North America S.a.r.l. and Auriga Polymers Inc.1 (collectively, “Invista”) are suing M & G USA Corporation and M & G Polymers USA, LLC (collectively, “M & G”) for infringement of United States Patent Nos. No. 7,919,159 (“the '159 patent”), 7,943,216 (“the '216 patent”), and 7,879,930 (“the '930 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”). (...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs INVISTA North America S.á.r.l. (“Invista NA”) and Auriga Polymers Inc. (“Auriga Polymers”)1 (collectively, “Invista”) are suing M & G USA Corporation (“M & G Corp.”) and M & G Polymers USA, LLC (“M & G LLC”) (collectively, “M & G”) for infringement of *634United States Patent Nos. 7,919,159 (“the '159 patent”), 7,943,216 (“the '216 patent”), and 7,879...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT [ECF No. 20]
This cause is before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Class Action Complaint (“Motion”) [ECF No. 20], filed March 18, 2013. Plaintiff filed a Response and Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Class Action Complaint [ECF No. 25], and Defendants filed a Reply to Plaintiffs Respo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion To Exclude DNA and Serology Test Results and Request for Daubert Hearing. [Doc. No. 422, filed April 22, 2012; Doc. No. 442 (Defendant’s (Corrected) Supplemental Memorandum), filed May 10, 2012], Defendant, on numerous grounds, asks the Court to hold a Daubert hearing and to exclude the Government’s DNA test resu...
Views: 1
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
DW. Data, Inc. (“DW Data”) is a Delaware Corporation that hosts and constructs small business websites, provides search engine submission service through a partnership with Earth Link and entertainment event ticketing services for performing arts venues on the web, and offers a free website community called Zoomsharé, a social network. Its annual ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants on January 22, 2013 (docs. 73, 75, 76). For the reasons stated below, the Motions are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN *662PART. The Consolidated Complaint’s § 12(a)(2) claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Kosmos Energy Ltd. (“Kosmos”).1 The Consolidated Complaint’s § 15 claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PR...
Views: 3
RULING ON MEDTRONIC DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
(Docs. 55, 58)
I. Introduction
In this diversity action commenced in March 2011, Plaintiff Koleen Otis-Wisher (“Otis-Wisher” or “Plaintiff’) asserts a variety of common-law tort and consumer fraud claims against Defendants Fletcher Allen Health Care, Inc. (“Fletcher Allen”), Medtronic, Inc. and Medtronic Sofamar Danek USA, Inc. (“Medtronic”). (D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss Counts I and II of the First Amended Complaint [DE 74], These two Counts are brought under the citizen suit provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Practices Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c). The Court has previously ruled on motions to dismiss the remaining counts, dismissing Count III but allow...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Pending before the court are crossmotions for summary judgment filed by the *1156parties. Each of the claims in this case arises out of defendants’ refusal to defend or indemnify plaintiff on a claim for which the plaintiff asserts the insurance policies in question should provide coverage.1
As previously set forth by the court, the facts relevant to this case began...
Views: 0
Page 88855
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On September 15, 2011, the Plaintiff 82-11 Queens Boulevard Realty Corp. (the “Plaintiff’ or “QBRC”) brought this action against the Defendant Sunoco, Inc. (R & M) (the “Defendant” or “Sunoco”) seeking damages and indemnification under an existing contract entered into between the parties as well as attorney’s fees and expert fees pursuant to the New York Navigati...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff Elizabeth Taub (“Plaintiff’) initiated this action on December 14, 2012, by filing a complaint against Defendant Comenity Bank, formerly known as World Financial Network Bank, successor by conversion to World Financial Network National Bank (“Defendant”). The Complaint alleges that Defendant violated the federal Truth in Lending A...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Between June 5, 2008 and August 5, 2009, plaintiff Glerisbet Pagán Ocasio (“Pagán”) worked as a radio host for RAAD Broadcasting Corp. (“RAAD”). During this period, Pagán claims she was the victim of sexual harassment, which created a hostile work environment for her. She sued RAAD for doing nothing about the situation. She alleges violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights A...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION AND ADDRESSING INSURANCE SETOFF ISSUE
Before this action may be concluded, two issues remain outstanding. First, Appleton Papers Inc. has filed a motion for *949reconsideration. Second, NCR and P.H. Glatfelter present an unresolved issue regarding a setoff from Glatfelter’s recovery against NCR. I address both of these issues below and direct entry of a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Court’s April 24, 2013, order to show cause (Doc. 61) and the motion for summary judgment filed by third-party defendant West Side Salvage, Inc. (“West Side”) (Doc. 50). DefendanVthird-party plaintiff ConAgra Foods, Inc. (“ConAgra”) has responded to the motion (Doc. 51). Each side has also responded to the order to show cause (Docs....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Rodney Wolfe sued two Washington County sheriffs, Thomas Routzahn and Joel Footen (collectively, “Defendants”), for using excessive force when they arrested him, in violation of his rights pursuant to the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.1 After a six-day trial, a jury found that Routzahn applied excessive force, but that Footen did not. It aw...
Views: 1
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the Court’s Opinion dated June 24, 2013 (doc. 104) is AMENDED such that Part V of the Opinion reads as follows:
V. CONCLUSION
Plaintiff has organizational standing based on the affidavit of Pamela Morris because she would have standing to sue in her own right and was a member of FFRF when the complaint was filed. Reaching the merits of the case, Lemon and Van Orden both s...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
MIHRETU BULTI DASISA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Thales Alenia Space France (“Thales”) filed this action against Thermo Funding Company, LLC (“Thermo”) for an alleged breach of contract. Thermo moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing that Thales did not adequately plead the validity of the agreement between the parties (Thales alleges personal jurisdi...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Vincenzo Milione claims he was demoted for promoting Italian-American affirmative action and condemning discrimination against Italian Americans. Plaintiff brings federal, state, and local law claims against three institutions and three leaders of the institutions: the City University of New York (“CUNY”), CUNY Cha...
Views: 1
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On July 6, 2010, the Grand Jury for the District of Delaware indicted defendant Marquis A. Lopez (“Lopez”) for: (1) possession with the intent to distribute 100 grams or more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B); (2) knowing possession of a Glock 22C semiautomatic ...
Views: 0
*1313OPINION AND ORDER On March 22, 2013, a federal jury found defendant James Timothy Turner guilty on every count in a 10-count indictment. Turner was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (count one), passing fictitious obligations in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 514 (count two), aiding and abetting the passing of fictitious obligations in violation of...
Views: 0
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I.THE ELEMENTS OF CERCLA LIABILITY1
1. This Court has previously held that in order to establish liability for response costs under Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a), Plaintiffs must make a four-part showing. First, Plaintiffs must prove that the Site is a “facility” as defined by CERCLA. Second, they must show that a “release” or “threatened release” of a hazardous...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this removed shareholder derivative action, two shareholders of Capital One Financial Corporation (“Capital One”) have brought suit against Capital One’s directors and officers, alleging that the directors and officers (i) breached their fiduciary duty of loyalty, (ii) committed corporate waste, and (iii) were unjustly enriched when they failed to prevent allegedly decepti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 1020
*1019A. Factual Background................................................1020
1. The parties.....................................................1020
2. Jurisdictional facts .............................................1021
B. Procedural Background.............................................
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Jason Curry’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion to Remand. (Doc. # 11). Defendant Pleasure-craft Marine Engine Company (“Defendant”) opposes. (Doc. # 15). For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED.
DISCUSSION
I. FACTS
Plaintiff filed his Petition in the Circuit Court of Taney County, Missouri on March 5, 2013. (Doc. # 1-1). On April 9, 2013...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Lead Plaintiffs Jeff Schram and Linda Schram (“Lead Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed an amended class action complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) against defendants CNinsure Inc. (“CNinsure”), Yinan Hu (“Hu”), Qiuping Lai (“Lai”), and Peng Ge (“Ge,” and collectively, “Defendants”), asserting two counts; (1) violation of Securitie...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LENEUOTI FIAFIA TUAUA, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 12-01143...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SWANSON GROUP MFG. LLC, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
DAVID HARVEY, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Following a three-day bench trial the Court issued a Memorandum of Decision (Docket No. 177) finding in favor of plaintiff RFF Family Partnership, LP (“RFF”) on several of its claims for breach of contract but in favor of defendant Link Development, LLP (“Link”) on its counterclaim for a surplus from the foreclosure sale (in the amount of $417,734). With respect to plaintiffs c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The instant litigation involves conflicting mortgages upon the same property. Currently pending before the Court is plaintiffs motion to enforce a settlement it entered into with former defendant in this case, Steven A. Ross, in his capacity as Trustee of BD Lending Trust.
I. Background
In 2006, Attorney Stuart Sojcher, purportedly acting on behalf of defendant Link Development...
Views: 0
Page 89676
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PETITIONER’S MOTION TO STAY
I. INTRODUCTION
The Petitioner, Randy K. Silva, is presently serving a sentence for the first-degree murder of James Schiano under a theory of deliberate premeditation, the armed assault of David DeAndrade with intent to kill, and the assault and battery of DeAndrade by means of a dangerous weapon. See Commonwealth v. Silva, 455 Ma...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In this civil action for monetary relief, plaintiff Terri Beal contends that defendant Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc. violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, the Wisconsin Consumer Act, Wis. Stat. §§ 427-428, and Wisconsin common law in attempting to collect a debt that plaintiff owed defendant for the purchase of timeshare points. Now before the court a...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction1 and both parties’ motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs seek injunctive and declaratory relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants who are members of the Committee on Attorney Advertising that is appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court (hereinafter the “State Judiciary Committee...
Views: 0
ORDER
The plaintiffs challenge two projects in the Gallatin National Forest — the Bozeman Municipal Watershed Project and the East Boulder Project. The Forest Service authorized the Bozeman Project on March 5, 2012. It involves logging and burning on several thousand acres over a 5-12 year time frame. The Service will need to construct 7 new miles of road and reopen 3 miles. The Service authorize...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ALLOWING LIMITED DISCOVERY
Introduction
In this ERISA action involving employee benefits under a pension plan, defendants move for partial summary judgment on the standard of review. Plaintiff opposes and requests leave to take limited discovery. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion for summary judgment is Denied. Plaintiffs request to take l...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GEO SPECIALTY CHEMICALS, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
"· )
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JUN 2 5 2013
, U.S Uistr'\\ct_& Bankruptf‘-Y
Gregory Scott Savoy, ) for the D\\strnct 01 Coluf'\\b‘@
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. l ,
, > 3 ~' 971
Urnted States, )
)
Defendant. )
MEl\\/IORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed
fnforma pauperfs. The Court...
Views: 1
OPINION
This is an employment discrimination case. Plaintiff Nicholas Recchia (“Recchia”) was terminated by Defendant Kellogg Company (“Kellogg”) as part of a restructuring program. Recchia brings claims against Kellogg under a variety of federal and state employment law statutes. Presently before the Court are Kellogg’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 47) and Motion to Seal (Dkt. No. 48).1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Pamela Casso has filed a one-count class action against LVNV Funding, LLC (“LVNV”), Resurgent Capital Ser*827vices, LP (“Resurgent”), and Alegis Group LLC (“Alegis”) (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging a single violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”). Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amen...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT l# 16] AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER [# 15] I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, Marsha Eagle, filed the instant action against her former employer, Hurley Medical Center (“HMC”), claiming that HMC violated the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff has filed this putative class action seeking recovery for defendant Nationstar Mortgage’s failure to permanently modify her home mortgage loan under the federal government’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). Plaintiff seeks redress for herself and the putative class pursuant to claims for breach of contract (Count I), promissory estoppel (Count II), breach of the...
Views: 0
Page 90154
ORDER REVERSING AND REMANDING CASE FOR FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
The Court, after careful consideration of the plaintiffs complaint, the parties’ briefs, all papers and exhibits filed in support and opposition thereto, the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge, and the balance of the record, does hereby find and ORDER:
(1) The Court a...
Views: 0
Page 90246
ORDER REVERSING AND REMANDING CASE FOR FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
The Court, after careful consideration of the plaintiffs complaint, the parties’ briefs, all papers and exhibits filed in support and opposition thereto, the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge, and the balance of the record, does hereby find and ORDER:
(1) The Court a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for Relief and/or Qualified and Sovereign Immunity, filed October 15, 2012 (Doc. 27)(“Motion to Dismiss”). The Court held a hearing on January 31, 2013. The primary issues are: (i) whether Defendant Central Consolidated School District (“CCSD”) is an improper party, beca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Doc. nos. 516 and 520. Plaintiffs have filed a putative class action alleging that Defendants’ issuance of second mortgages violated, inter alia, the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. (“RES-PA”), the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., as amended by the Home Owne...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
A. Introduction and Procedural History
In August 2012, John McKinney filed suit in this Court, presenting claims for *801negligence under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. 30101 et seq., and for unseaworthiness, maintenance, cure, and wages under general maritime law. Named as Defendant was McKinney’s former employer, American River Transportation Company (ART-CO). McKinney alleged ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM I. INTRODUCTION After two mistrials, Lacey Graves was convicted of armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2118(d). Presently before the Court is Graves’s Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The motion presents two issues; First, whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to facially invalid search warrants — the search warrants ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
:
DONNIE WAYNE SHEFFIELD, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The government now seeks leave of court pursuant to Fed.R. Crim.P. 48(a) to dismiss this case in which I have ordered a new trial and the government has withdrawn its appeal from that order. A discussion (I) regarding the recent travel of the case and (II) regarding the case law construing rule 48(a), including a reflection on my own doubts about whether a requirement of leave of cou...
Views: 0
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff commenced this action pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”). Currently pending before the court are defendant’s motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim (Item 10) and for sanctions (Item 11) and plaintiffs motion for leave to amend/correct the complaint (Item 14).
BACKGROUND and FACTS
Plaintiff commenced this action wit...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
SCOTT J. BRODIE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1136 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Plaintiff Smith & Nephew, Inc. (“S & N”), sued defendants Interlace Medical, Inc., and Hologic, Inc. (collectively “Hologic”),1 for infringing two patents: U.S. Patent No. 7,226,459 (“the '459 patent”), relating to an arthroscopic surgical instrument, and U.S. Patent No. 8,061,359 (“the '359 patent”), relating to a surgical endoscopic cutting device and method for its use...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants Diversified Employment Solutions’ and Cornerstone Innovations Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 7). Plaintiff Matthew Bracken has filed a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss (Doc. II),1 and Defendants Diversified Employment Solutions and Cornerstone Innovations Inc. have filed a reply (Doc. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
The Court has before it the State’s motion for partial summary judgment. The Court heard oral argument on February 26, 2013, and took the motion under advisement. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant the State’s motion, to the extent it asks the Court to find the state’s no-camping statute, Section 67-1613, Idaho Code, is facially constitutional. The...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently pending before the Court is the motion for summary judgment (doc. 25) of Defendant Eric Kamoie. The motion has been fully briefed (docs. 27, 32, 34) and is therefore ripe for our review. For the reasons that follow, we will grant the motion in its entirety and enter judgment in favor of the Defendant.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The Plaintiff, Luke A. Meketa (“Meketa” or “Plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Austin Radiological Association’s (“ARA”) Motion for Clarification (Dkt. No. 98) and Relator Katherine J. Simms’s (“Simms”) Response (Dkt. No. 102). The following documents are also considered in relation to ARA’s Motion for Clarification: Advisory to the Court regarding Relator’s List of Issues Remaining (Dkt. No. 106) and an Exhibit List, submitted in camer...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On December 15, 2011, Defendant Dollar General Corporation removed this action from Kansas state court. Plaintiff Constance Wagoner originally filed a complaint alleging negligence, specifically premises liability, and seeking damages against Dollar General Corporation resulting from her trip and fall on or about November 7, 2010, within a Dollar General store in Park City,...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently pending before the Court are: (1) Defendant Boston Scientific Corporation’s (“Boston Scientific”) Motion for Summary Judgment, [dkt. 140]; and (2) Pro se Plaintiff Adeniran Oyebade’s Motion to Supplement Response/Answers to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [dkt. 153].
I.
Litigation History
Due to the lengthy and protracted history of this litigation, the Court finds it n...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PETER G. EDWARDS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Ac...
Views: 0
Page 90985
MEMORANDUM RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR REMAND
I. Introduction
Plaintiff, William Rosa, seeks judicial review of the Social Security Administration’s (“SSA”) denial of his application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). Rosa contends that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied him a full and fair hearing by failing to order a consultative examination of his physical...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This lawsuit challenges recent Alabama legislation that would require all physicians who perform abortions at the State’s licensed abortion clinics to obtain staff privileges at a local hospital. Plaintiffs Planned Parenthood Southeast Inc., Reproductive Health Services, and June Ayers, RN, on behalf of themselves, their patients, physicians, and staff, allege that, if enacted, t...
Views: 0
Page 91058
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendant ASUS Computer International Inc.’s (“ACI”) motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue or, in the alternative, to transfer the present action to the Northern District of California. (D.I. 11) The Court held a hearing on October 11, 2012. (D.I. 34) (“Tr.”) Subsequently, pursuant to the Court’s Order (D.I. 32), the parties...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 10-256-08, -09, -20 (RMC)
)
NOE MACHADO-ERAZO, ...
Views: 0
Page 91071
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MATTHEW SISSEL,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 10-1263 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Neil Daugherty (“Mr. Daugherty”) initiated this job retaliation case arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against Defendant Warehouse Home Furnishings Distributors, Inc., d/b/a Farmers Home Furniture (“Farmers”) on March 21, 2012. (Doc. 1). The lawsuit stems from acts of retaliation that Mr. Daugherty...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this action originally filed in state court, Plaintiff Sharon Blair brings a claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., alleging that her Long Term Disability (“LTD”) benefits under an employee welfare benefit plan were wrongfully terminated. (Doc.1 1-1 at 3-4 (“Complaint” or “Compl.”)). Defendant Metropolitan Life ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
PETER J. VROOM, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SARAH A. PORTER,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-2304 (JEB/AK)
CAROLYN COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner,
Social Security Administration,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On May 8...
Views: 0
Page 91088
OPINION
Currently pending before the Court is the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings by Defendant Infinity Access LLC. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion shall be denied.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This matter stems from an insurance policy coverage dispute. Plaintiff Liberty International Underwriters Canada (“LIU”) is an insurance agency based in Toronto, Ontario,...
Views: 0
Page 91104
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Tommy Lee Banks (“Plaintiff’) brings this action pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act, seeking review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying his application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). Plaintiff alleges that the decision of Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) John P. Costello was not supported by ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On December 21, 2012, the Plaintiff Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC (“Great Lakes”) commenced this action against the Defendant Marius Fortelni (“Fortelni”), seeking a declaratory judgment to determine the rights of the parties with regard to a contract of marine insurance. Presently before the Court is the Plaintiffs motion to dismiss the Defendant’s third count...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the 23 January 2013 motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Law Enforcement Associates Corporation (“LEA”), Anthony Rand (“Rand”), James J. Lindsay (“Lindsay”), Joseph A. Jordan (“Jordan”) and Paul Briggs (“Briggs”).1 (DE # 92.) Also before the court is the 11 February 2013 motion filed by plaintiffs Paul H. Feldman (“Feldman”) and Martin L. Perr...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This dispute over the scope of a professional liability insurance policy arises from a somewhat unusual set of facts, at least as far as professional liability insurance policies are concerned. Whittington Law Associates, PLLC and W.E. Whittington (collectively, the “Whittington defendants”) were evidently the victims of what has become known as a “Nigerian Check Scam.” In the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Here we consider an appeal from the Commissioner’s denial of Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-433, 1381-1383Í. (Doc. 1.) For the reasons discussed below, we conclude remand to the Commissioner is required.
I. Background
A. Procedural Background
Plaintiff appl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court are motions to dismiss Plaintiff Angela Borrell’s Amended Complaint filed by Defendants Bloomsburg University and Michelle Ficca (Doc. 29) and Geisinger Medical Center and Arther F. Richer. (Doc. 32.) Angela Borrell, formerly a student in the Nurse Anesthesia Program offered by Bloomsburg University in partnership with Geisinger Medical Center, contends Def...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On April 11, 2013, plaintiff Kolel Beth Yeehiel Mechil of Tartikov, Inc. (“Kolel Beth”) filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) against John Hancock Life Insurance Company (“John Hancock”) seeking the payment of $10,000,000 for the life insurance policy insuring the life of Edith Gold-stein (the “Goldstein JH Policy”). On May 8, 2013, Kolel Beth filed an application for an order to ...
Views: 0
Page 91341
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Filing No. 41) filed by Defendants Robert Murray (“Murray”), Ryan Boe (“Boe”), and Lamson, Dugan & Murray, LLP (“Lamson Dugan”) (collectively “Defendants”). Also before the Court is the Mo*1032tion to Retransfer Case or Retain Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (Filing No. 47), filed by the Plaintiffs R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a case concerning provocative public statements allegedly made by an attorney, Ming Hai, about his former client, a well-known Chinese celebrity, Lan Sang. Sang brings this action against Hai and the Law Offices of Ming Hai, P.C. (“Defendants”), alleging, inter alia, libel and slander. Defendants now move to dismiss the case in its entirety, or in the alternative, t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs, Green Party of Tennessee and the Constitutional Party of Tennessee, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Defendants: Tre Hargett, Tennessee Secretary of State, and Mark Goins, Tennessee’s Coordinator of Election. Plaintiffs are political parties that seek recognition and ballot access for their candidates in Tennessee’s state and national elections. Plaintif...
Views: 0
Page 91394
ORDER Alexander Graham filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, doc. 1, and this Court granted him leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). Doc. 10. It then directed the state to supply transcripts and other records in support of its opposition brief, which was already in the record when this case was transferred here from another district. Id. The state, however, moves to *1340strike that brief as a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. For reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS this motion.
I. Factual Background
At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Plaintiff Tracey Thompson was a part-time regular mail handler for the United States Postal Service (USPS) at the Napoleon Street Annex in San Francisco. (...
Views: 0
OPINION
This dispute arises from a medical practice merger. The plaintiff, Michael M. Torsiello, M.D., folded his practice into that of Defendant Walk In Wound Medical Associates, P.C. (“WIW”), allegedly in exchange for a minority ownership stake and certain compensation and benefits. Torsiello alleges that he did not receive his end of the bargain. Instead, the Defendants allegedly breached thei...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Joan Shelley, Michelle Loftis and Sandra Hoyopatubbi (collectively “Plaintiffs”) allege violations of federal constitutional law and state tort law by municipal defendants, the County of San Joaquin and San Joaquin County Sheriff Steve Moore (collectively “Defendants”); Plaintiffs also sue Sheriff Moore in his individual capacity for damages. This case concerns the...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING VTB BANK’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINTS
On March 18, 2012, Anzhey Barantsevich filed this action against VTB Bank.1 *979On January 4, 2013, VTB Bank moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.2 Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint that added VTB Capital AM, VTB Capital, and Beau Camer...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Monique M. Bryan-Toledo (hereinafter “Plaintiff’ or “Bryan”), an al*238leged resident of the state of Arizona, filed the above-captioned diversity suit for damages against defendant Wal-Mart Puerto Rico, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant” or “Wal-Mart”). See Docket No. 1. The Plaintiff alleges that, on or about December 24, 2008, she “slipped and fell due to a water puddl...
Views: 0
Page 91484
ORDER Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or Transfer Venue (Doc. 14) and Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 12). For the following reasons, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED and Plaintiffs complaint is DISMISSED. Should Plaintiff desire, it shall have fourteen days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint. In addition, Plaintiffs Motion for Tempor...
Views: 1
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91486: Oklahoma Firefighters Pension & Retirement System v. Student Loan Corp.
Page 91486
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Lead plaintiffs Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System and Elk-horn Partners LP (collectively, “plaintiffs”) bring this putative class action against Student Loan Corporation (“Student Loan Corp.”), once a leading originator of student loans, and certain of its former officers, as well as Citigroup, Inc., Citibank, N.A. (“CBNA”), Citi Holdings, Inc., and Discov...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is “Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel,” (Dkt. No. 86), filed April 12, 2013. Plaintiffs have specifically addressed their motion to compel to “Defendant United States and the individual [United States] Defendants,” and have seemingly excluded the remaining Defendants. {Id. at 1). The parties have agreed that the disputed materials which form the ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Christopher G. DiPalma, represented by counsel, brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying him Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”). (Dkt. No. 1: Compl.) Presently before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for judgment o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On June 20, 2013, plaintiffs Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, Inc. (“Planned Parenthood”) and Dr. Orrin Moore filed suit against Kansas state officials, challenging the constitutionality of certain provisions of recently enacted H.B. 2253, 85th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Kan. 2013) (the “Act”). This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Moti...
Views: 0
*1261
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a race and age employment discrimination action brought by the plaintiff, Jennie McQueen, against the defendants, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (‘Wells Fargo”) and Aerotek. The complaint first alleges one count for race discrimination under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(Doc. 31, 35)
Plaintiff Lisa Rotman brings this insurance coverage action seeking compensation under the uninsured motorist insurance policy she holds with Defendants Progressive Insurance Company (“Progressive”), as well as the excess coverage uninsured motorist insurance policy s...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”), American Brokers Conduit (“Conduit”), American Home Mortgage Services, Inc. (“AHMSI”), and Beltway Capital Management, LLC (“Beltway”) petition this Court on a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendants argue that Plaintiff Thomas Koolen’s claim for De...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNTS II AND III OF THE COMPLAINT AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ COUNTER MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNTS II AND III
On March 1, 2013, Plaintiff Kauai Beach Villas — Phase II, LLC (“KBV”) filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment on Counts II and III of the Complaint (“KBV Motio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER1
Before the Court is the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (R & R), recommending:
1. that the EMTALA claims against Hospital San Antonio (“HSA”) with respect to the patient’s August 14, 2010 visit be dismissed with prejudice;
2. that the claims brought pursuant to Puerto Rico law against HSA for that visit be dismissed without prejudice;
3. that plaintiffs John Kenyon...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER1 Before the Court is defendant Gilberto Casillas-Esquilin’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”). (Docket No. 13.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part defendant’s motion. I. BACKGROUND A. Procedural Background On October 12, 2012, plaintiff Linnette Falcon-Cuevas (“Falcon”) filed a p...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendants Gladstone Law Group and Roger N. Gladstone’s (“Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Class Action Complaint. (D.E. No. 27). Defendants seek to dismiss Plaintiff Gina Battle’s (“Plaintiff’) First Amended Class Action Complaint pursuant to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Brian Hollnagel and BCI Aircraft Leasing, Inc. have moved for a judgment of acquittal (R. 467) and for a new trial (R. 498, 531) on Counts One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, and Twelve of the Second Superseding Indictment. For the reasons explained below, the Court denies Defendants’ motion for judgment of acquittal. The Court also denies Defendants’ motion...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KWAKU ATTAKORA,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1413 (CKK)
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(July 1, 20...
Views: 0
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Trial by jury is one of the hallmarks of our justice system and one of the bedrock principles upon which our Nation was founded. It is embedded in our Constitution.1 Our founders believed it to be more than a judicial procedure; they viewed it as a safeguard against tyranny.2 It is therefore not surprising that the judiciary has long recognized the deference to be paid to jur...
Views: 0
*194
OPINION
Plaintiff Adrian Schoolcraft (“Plaintiff’ or “Schoolcraft”) has moved to enjoin1 all further administrative proceedings by defendant the City of New York (“City”) and the New York Police Department (“NYPD”) against him, including the administrative hearing that had been scheduled to begin on June 17, 2013 (the “Hearing”).
Upon the conclusions set forth below, the motion is granted....
Views: 0
Page 91793
MEMORANDUM OPINION In this patent infringement action, the University of South Florida Board of Trustees (“USF”) moves, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(b)(2), to amend the pleadings to conform to the evidence and allow it to plead the counterclaim that it had submitted with its motion to intervene in the action. In the proposed counterclaim, USF requests a declaration that USF own...
Views: 0
Page 91795
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In its posLtrial motion seeking judgment as a matter of law or a new trial, plaintiff Alzheimer’s Institute of America (“AIA”) challenges the jury verdict finding that Michael Mullan was not the sole inventor and that John Hardy, at least, was a co-inventor of the Swedish mutation inventions that are the patents-in-suit, and that the University of South Florida (“USF”) did no...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner David Russell Danner (“Danner”), who is presently incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution in Coal Township, Pennsylvania, initiated this action on May 17, 2011, by filing a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, as amended August 18, 2011. (Doc. 11.) In the petition, Danner challenges his 2008 conviction and sentence in the Court...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FELECIA TAYLOR, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 08-0578 (BJR)
v.
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANDREA CANNON, on behalf of herself
and all other similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-465 (CKK)
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORA...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AHMAD HALIM and
SHARIF ABDELHALIM,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Civil Action No. 12-00384 (CKK)
SHAUN DONOVAN, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
Page 91871
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court for review of an adverse ruling by the Social Security Administration. *1050I. Procedural History On February 3, 2009, plaintiff Betty S. Shew 'filed an application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et. seq.; (Tr. 133-140), with an alleged onset date of Janu...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for prehminary injunction (Dkt. No. 4). Blytheville School District No. 5 (the “Blytheville District”) responded to the motion, as directed by the Court (Dkt. No. 16). On June 17, 2013, the Court entered an order requesting additional briefing by the parties and directed the Blytheville District to respond to the motion for preliminary in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant The Prudential Insurance Company of America for judgment on the pleadings, which the court has converted to a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Theresa A. Taylor has responded to the motion and the court, having considered the memoranda of authorities, together with attachments submitted by the parties, ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant eTagz’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss,1 wherein it moves this Court for dismissal based on a lack of personal jurisdiction over Defendant and for Plaintiff Athletic Training Innovations, LLC’s (“Plaintiff’) alleged failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Having considered the complaint, the motion, the opposition, the reply, t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner Marshall has petitioned this Court for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to bar his prosecution for the murder of George Carpenter pending in the Bristol County Superior Court. Six people, including the Petitioner, have been tried for the beating death of Mr. Carpenter. The evidence against Petitioner was that he kicked Mr. Carpenter twice in th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER On January 24, 2013, the Defendant, Jonathan K. Smith, (the “Defendant”), removed this case to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1). Presently before the Court is a motion by the Plaintiff, the People of the State of New York, (the “People”), seeking to remand this action to its original forum, the Criminal Court of the Town of East Hampton, Suffolk County, N...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Defendant the City of New York moves under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint for retaliation pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq.1 Plaintiff cannot establish that he had a good faith, reasonable belief that his supervisor’s conduct toward plaintiffs secretary constitut...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiffs, Cecil Singleton, S.M. (“John Doe”), and Kevin Kiadii, each bring claims against the defendant, Kevin Clash, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255(a). All of the plaintiffs allege that when they were minors, the defendant used a facility or means of interstate commerce to persuade' or induce them to engage in sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. John Doe als...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff Kenneth F. Phillips (“Plaintiff’ or “Phillips”) brings claims for breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, quantum meruit and unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, and breach of fiduciary duties against Reed Group, LTD (“the LTD”), Reed Group, LLC (“the LLC”), Stacey Grace (“Grace”), Presley Reed (“Reed”), and Peter B. Nagel (“Na-gel”) as Trustee of...
Views: 0
*566
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order and to Compel Plaintiffs Deposition, Independent Medical Examination and Mediation to Take Place in New York Where the Plaintiff Resides (DE 30) which was referred to Lurana S. Snow, United States Magistrate Judge. The motion is ripe for consideration.
This case arises out of personal injuries the Plaintiff ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration of my endorsed order granting Richard D. Gitlin’s motion to quash subpoena and for protective order (doc. 5), and third-party witness, Richard D. Gitlin’s (“Gitlin”) response (doc. 6). Only limited circumstances prompt reconsideration of a court order. These include (1) an intervening change in the controlling law; (2) new evidence...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Darren Bye (“Bye”) and his wife (“Mrs. Bye”) (collectively, the “Byes”) bring this suit for damages against his employer, Cianbro Corporation1 (“Cianbro”), for injuries sustained by Bye in the course of his employment while performing repair work on a Connecticut bridge. Specifically, the Byes allege (1) that, given the conditions of the worksite, Cianbro kn...
Views: 6
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCS. 66, 67, 69, 70, 71 & 72).
I. INTRODUCTION
This case concerns events that took place within the Tuolumne Fire Department (“TFD”) in 2010. Plaintiffs Benjamin Oyarzo and Nicholas Hart, former employees of TFD, allege that certain of their superiors, both within TFD and on TFD’s Board of Directors, retaliated against th...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a consolidated multi-district litigation (“MDL”) relating to contamination—actual or threatened—of groundwater from various defendants’ use of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (“MTBE”) and/or tertiary butyl alcohol, a product formed by the breakdown of MTBE in water. In this ease, plaintiff Orange County Water District (the “District”),...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
The plaintiffs, Patriot Exploration, LLC, Jonathan Feldman, Redwing Drilling Partners, Mapleleaf Drilling Partners, Avalanche Drilling Partners, Penguin Drilling Partners and Gramax Insurance Company Ltd., allege that the defendants, SandRidge Energy, Inc. (“SandRidge”), SandRidge Exploration and Production, LLC, Tom L. Ward (Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of B...
Views: 0
*704
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Daniel J. Lemaster (“Lemaster”) brings this action against his former employer, Anchor Hocking, LLC (“Anchor”),1 and the labor union he formerly belonged to, United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, Local Union # 25 (“USW” or “Union”), alleging violations of the Labor Management R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTION TO APPOINT LEARNED COUNSEL (DOCKET ENTRY # 10) Pending before this court is a .motion filed by defendant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (“the defendant”) to appoint two attorneys that are “ ‘learned in the law applicable to capital cases’ ” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3005 (“section 3005”). (Docket Entry # 10) (quoting section 3005). The defendant requests appointment of J...
Views: 0
Page 92280
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Civil Action No. 12-1668 (JDB)
COMMISSION,
Defendant,
and
OXFAM AMERICA, INC.
Intervenor-Defendant.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
FITZGERALD SCOTT )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On June 11, 2013, the Court entered an Order (Document No. 36) granting Defendants’ Opposed Motion to Vacate Attachment and Dismiss Complaint (Document No. 22). The Court’s ruling was based on the motion, submissions, applicable law, and oral arguments presented to the Court on Monday, June 10, 2013, at a hearing in open court. The Court’s determination was grounded on the fi...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, filed April 5, 2013 (Clerk’s Dkt. # 139); Plaintiffs Response to Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, filed April 19, 2013 (Clerk’s Dkt. # 150); Defendant’s Reply in Support of Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, filed April 26, 2013 (Clerk’s Dkt. # 151.); and Plaintiffs Sur...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, their oppositions and their replies. On June 7, 2013, the Court held a hearing. (Dkt. No. 247.) Matthew Butler, Esq. and Andrew Myers, Esq. appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs and Ashley Abel, Esq. and Jennifer Santa ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Darrick Hundt sued his employer, DireetSat USA, LLC, its corporate parents, UniTek USA, LLC, and three corporate officers, Elizabeth Downey, Cathy Lawley, and Dan Yannantuono, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (the “FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., and the Illinois Minimum Wage Act (the “IMWA”), 815 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/2-209. The court prev...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff
v. CASE NO.: 1:12-CV-01230-KBJ
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
and
GOODRICH CORPORATION
Defendants
FINAL JUDGMENT
WHEREAS, Plaintiff, United...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. Introduction The defendant in this civil rights action, the Addison Rutland Supervisory Union (“ARSU”), has filed a partial motion to dismiss. (Doc. 25.) The ARSU seeks to dismiss the claims of the plaintiff, Marcel Cyr, on the grounds that: (1) he possesses no First Amendment rights with respect to school property; (2) he possesses no liberty or property interest in acce...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case concerns disputed claims to the ownership of $119,030.00 in United States currency seized by the government during a search following a traffic stop on Interstate 81 in western Virginia. Although the driver of the vehicle, Jonte D. Hamilton (“Hamilton”), denied any knowledge or ownership of the large volume of cash hidden in the rental car at the time of the traffic...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs John DeBiaso and Rachael Ann Currie bring this action against Defendant Kristina Spitz, alleging that Spitz, in her role as a child protective services worker for the State of Oregon’s Department of Human Services (DHS), violated their constitutional rights and those of their child C.D., on whose behalf they appear as “next friend,” when Defendant removed C.D. from the ...
Views: 1
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION .....................................255
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ..............................................256
A. Three Generations of Ford Windstar Rear Axles.........................256
B. The Benteler Axle: Model Years 1998)4-2003 ............................259
1. Initial Testing....................................................259
2. Post-Test Monitoring..........
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiffs, sixteen businesses in various industries, allege that the three individual defendants used various corporate entities they controlled (which the Court collectively refers to as “IPA” unless otherwise required) in a pattern of racketeering activity that swindled the plaintiffs into purchasing expensive but unnecessary or worthless business management ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
MARY TURNER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. ) Civi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is the Motion to Remand (Doc. 7) filed by the Plaintiff, Ernesteen Jones (“Ms. Jones”). The court has considered the arguments made in this document, as well as those made in Ms. Jones’s “Memorandum of Law” supporting the motion (Doc. 8) and the Response (Doc. 10) filed by the Defendant, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“NPC”) 1 For the followi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
STEVE STEINBERG, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant’s motion (Doc. 10) to dismiss the charge against him, alleging an assault by striking, beating or wounding, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(4) and 18 U.S.C. § 1152, a Class B misdemeanor also referred to as a petty offense.1
Defendant’s motion and the government’s response raise matters for the Court’s consideration which other courts have lef...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
When Tom Petters’s Ponzi scheme collapsed in 2008, hundreds of investors— from retirees to hedge funds- — -lost nearly everything. Two such “losers” were the Cayman Islands-based hedge funds Palm Beach Offshore, Ltd. and Palm Beach Offshore II, Ltd. (together, the “Palm Beach Funds” or the “Funds”), which lost over $700 million. Plaintiff Geoffrey Varga i...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court upon the motion to amend by plaintiff and the motion to dismiss by defendants.1 Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, both motions are granted in part.
BACKGROUND
This employment dispute arises out of the termination of plaintiff Alaa E. Elkharwily by defendant Mayo Clinic Health System-Albert Lea (MCHSAL...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court are: (1) Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Specific Medical Causation (Doc. 110); (2) Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Inadequate Warnings and Remaining Claims (Doc. 112); and (3) Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Punitive Damages Claim (Doc. 114). The Court now rules on the Motions.
I. BACKGROUND1
The Court previously set for...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Blytheville School District No. 5 (the “Blytheville District”) (Dkt. No. 7). Plaintiffs have responded (Dkt. No. 11), and the Blytheville District has replied *974(Dkt. No. 12). On June 17, 2013, the Court entered an order requesting additional briefing by the parties (Dkt. No. 15). That order also set a hearing on the motion ...
Views: 0
Page 92839
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
This court dismissed Plaintiffs complaint on April 9, 2013. Plaintiff had until May 9, 2013 to file a notice of appeal.1 Plaintiff missed this deadline. Instead, on May 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed an untimely notice of appeal. Plaintiff then filed a Motion for an Extension of Time fox Appeal with the First Circuit. The First Circuit remanded Plaintiffs motion to this court fo...
Views: 0
Page 92916
DECISION AND ORDER
I. Introduction and Preliminary Matters
Joseph P. Gusky (“Gusky” or “Plaintiff”), through counsel, commenced an action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to review the final determination of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security that Plaintiff was not entitled to a waiver of the recovery of an overpayment of benefits. See Dkt. No. 1.
By Report and Recommendation (“the R & R”)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The present lawsuit challenges several changes California has implemented with respect to its payment for services provided to developmentally disabled individuals under the federally funded Medicaid program.
Plaintiffs are the ARC of California (“ARC”) and the Cerebral Palsy Association of San Diego (“CPA”).1 Arc is a statewide organization comprised of individuals with inte...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant CACI Premier Technology, Inc.’s (“CACI PT”) Motion for Reconsider*858ation, or in the alternative Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Alien Tort Statute Claims (Doc. 354), and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. 363). This case concerns the civil tort claims of four Iraqi cit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Every case begins with a story. Here, much of that story is uncontestéd. All agree that on a dark night, in the spring of 2011, Kevin Pennington was physically and brutally assaulted on a deserted road in Kingdom Come State Park by Jason and Anthony Jenkins. The jury saw photographs of Mr. Pennington’s injuries and heard the fear in his voice during a desperate call to 911 for ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation’s Motion and Memorandum of Law for Judgment on the Pleadings Based on Judicial Estoppel [DE 67] (“Motion”). The Court has carefully considered the Motion, Plaintiff’s Response [DE 79] (“Response”), Defendant’s Reply [DE 80] (“Reply”), the record in the case, a...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DENNIS MAXBERRY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
) Civil Action N...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendant Progressive Casualty Insurance Company has moved under Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to severe certain claims and to stay discovery. (ECF No. 11.) Progressive asks this Court to severe the Plaintiff Bank Rhode Island’s (“BankRI”) claims for coverage from its claims for bad faith. BankRI objects (ECF No. 16) and asks this Court to bifurcate the two sets of claim...
Views: 0
Respondent Sheena Monnin (“Monnin”) is the former Miss Pennsylvania USA, and this matter relates to a dispute between Monnin and the Miss Universe .L.P., LLLP (“MUO”), which organizes and runs the Miss USA Pageant together with one of its equity owners, Donald Trump. Before the Court are Petitioner MUO’s petition to confirm the Arbitration Award entered in its favor, pursuant to the Federal Arbitr...
Views: 0
B.UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. Criminal Case No. 07-65 (GK)
CHRISTIAN FERNANDO BORDA and
ALVARO ALVARAN-VELEZ,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On December ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Petitioner Rashid Walker, appearing pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
The petition now is before the Court following initial review by Chief Judge Carol B. Amon, to whom the petition originally was assigned. Upon her review pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, on December 17, 2010, Judge Amon ordered Walker to show ca...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS, AND ENHANCEMENT AWARDS
I. INTRODUCTION
On May 6, 2013, Plaintiffs Christina Barbosa (“Barbosa”) and Patricia Aguilera Barrios (“Barrios,” collectively “Plaintiffs”) and Defendant Cargill Meat Solutions Corporation (“Defendant”) filed a joint motion requesting final approval ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
The Court has before it Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 20). Plaintiff, Speed-Connect LLC, a Michigan limited liability company, brought this action against Idaho Falls Wireless Partnership (“IFWP”), a District of Columbia general partnership, seeking declaratory judgment that plaintiff has not violated any right held by defendant or committed any to...
Views: 0
Page 93264
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court are the bankruptcy appeals of Civil Cases Nos. 12-1515 and 12-2026.1
I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual History
The Court draws the following relevant facts from the bankruptcy court’s order dated May 15, 2012, (Docket No. 1-4 at pp. 58-62):
On January 16, 2001, First Bank of Puerto Rico, Inc. (“First Bank”), Health Distillers International, Inc. (“HDI”), and Internati...
Views: 0
*1113ORDER LIFTING STAY; DENYING MOTION TO REMAND; and GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS.
The Court previously considered Plaintiff Phillip Sims’ Motion to Remand (Doc. # 8) and stayed this action (Order, February 27, 2013, Doc. # 21, 2013 WL 753496) pending the outcome of Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1345, 185 L.Ed.2d 439 (2013). The iss...
Views: 1
ORDER This case comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [14]. I. Legal Standard Summary judgment is appropriate when “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R.CrvP. 56(a). There is a “genuine” dis*1356pute as to a material fact if “the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a ver...
Views: 0
ORDER On May 9, 2010, what started as a response to a 9-1-1 call regarding Audrecas Davis having a seizure in his hotel room ended with his unfortunate death. On March 16, 2011, Plaintiffs, who include Davis’s estate and his two surviving children, filed this case in the State Court of DeKalb County, claiming that Davis’s death was a result of being repeatedly shot with a Taser gun by DeKalb Cou...
Views: 0
ORDER On May 21, 2013, the Court entered an order granting Plaintiffs summary judgment on their claim of vote dilution under § 2 of the Voting Rights Act and denying *1362the County Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. This case comes before the Court on the County Defendants’ motion to certify an interlocutory appeal of four issues they have identified related to that order and to stay this...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
The plaintiffs in this case are five same-sex couples who allege that Michigan Pub-*946lie Act 297 (2011) is unconstitutional because it violates their rights under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. Public Act 297 prohibits public employers ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Douglas Brooks brings suit against Defendant AM Resorts, LLC (“AM Resorts”). Brooks alleges that AM Resorts gained unauthorized accessed to his computer and email account in violation of the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq., the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”), 18 U.S.C. § 1030, et seq., and the Pennsylvania counterpart to the SCA, 18 Pa. C...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
In this consolidated action, plaintiffs Edwin Lopez, Richard Lester, Ryan Montalvo, and Jonathan Valdes (collectively “Plaintiffs”) seek recovery from their former employer, defendant Burris Logistics, Inc. (“Burris” or “Defendant”), for their wrongful terminations on February 21, 2012.1 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion, purs...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ESTATE OF MARK PARSONS, et al.,
Civil Action No. 07-1847 (BJR)
Plaintiffs,
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON
v.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KAREN RUNNYMEDE-PIPER,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-00930 (CKK)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action arises out of defendant Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company’s (“FFIC”) refusal to fully reimburse plaintiff Kenneth Feld for more than $4.5 million in legal fees and expenses that Feld claims to have incurred in a prior, protracted legal battle in this district. Currently before the Court is FFIC’s motion to compel discovery. For the reasons set forth below, the moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Procter & Gamble Distributing LLC, The Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, and The Procter & Gamble Company (collectively, “Procter & Gamble”) are defendants in a multidistriet litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, In re Denture Cream Products Liability Litigation, Civ. No. 09-2051 (S.D.Fla.). Currently before thi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
This is a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case that arises out of Defendant’s attempt to collect on a default judgment entered against Plaintiff-debtor in Jackson District Court. This matter is presently before the Court on Defendant First Resolution Investment Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)...
Views: 1
*309
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
In this case, this Court determined that petitioner Leiticia Castaneda (“Castaneda”) did not fall within the scope of the mandatory detention provisions set forth at 8 U.S.C. section 1226(c). Castaneda, a native and citizen of Brazil, sought a writ of habeas corpus challenging .her detention by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) of the U.S. Departme...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant Jefferson Parish Hospital Service District No. 2, Parish of Jefferson’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment,1 wherein it seeks the dismissal of Plaintiff Marilyn R. Lewis’s (“Lewis”) complaint. After considering the complaint, the pending motion, the memorandum in support, the opposition, the reply, the record, and the applicable law, the Co...
Views: 0
Page 93694
OPINION AND ORDER
The defendant, Police Officer Elvis Duran, has moved for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 seeking to dismiss the claims alleged against him by the plaintiff, Juther Perez. The plaintiff alleges claims for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and denial of the right to a fair trial in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The circumstances surrounding th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER CONFIRMING PRONOUNCED ORDER OF THE COURT DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AS MOOT AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT1
I. Background
On June 21, 2012, the plaintiff, Tony B. Clay, filed a complaint against the defendants, Consol Pennsylvania Coal Company, LLC (“Consol PA”), Mc...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
RORY WALSH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-2214 (RWR)
)
FEDERAL ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
VIRGINIA CARAZANI, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 12-107 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Discharging Order to Show Cause; Granting Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Default; Ordering Parties to Meet and Confer
I. INTRODUCTION
The Clerk of this Court entered default against defendant William Kellibrew (“Kelli-brew”) for torts allegedly committed against plaintiff Edwin Creeey. After entering default, the Court scheduled a hearing for entry of final judgment against ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES [11]
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Martin Vogel’s Complaint alleges that Defendant Huntington Oaks Delaware Partners, LLC failed to maintain accessible facilities in violation of state and federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. In response, Huntington submitted its Answer, which included the following 26 affirmativ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The United States of America (the “United States”) brings this petition on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) to enforce an administrative summons served by the IRS on Zhong H. Chen (“Chen”) pursuant to 26 U.S.C. section 7604(a). Pet. Enforce IRS Summons (“IRS Pet.”) ¶ 1, ECF No. 1. In support of its summons, the IRS alleges that its request fo...
Views: 0
Page 93794
RULING ON JUDICIAL REVIEW
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION......................................................1018
II. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS................................................1018
III. PRINCIPLES OF REVIEW.............................................1019
TV. FACTS................................................................1020
A. Education and Employment Background...................
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
During every summer from 1995 until June 2012, plaintiff William F. Hassay, Jr., an accomplished violinist, performed as a “street artist” on the beachfront boardwalk in Ocean City, Maryland. On June 22, 2012, Hassay was warned by an Ocean City police officer that the volume of his music violated an Ocean City noise ordinance enacted in February 2012, which prohibited, inter al...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING THE CITY OF OAKLAND’S MOTION TO STAY FORFEITURE PROCEEDINGS [Dkt. No. 56] Concurrently filed in: No C. 12-03566 MEJ, No. C 12-03567 MEJ I. BACKGROUND On October 10, 2012, the City of Oakland filed this lawsuit challenging the Federal Government’s initiation of a civil forfeiture action against property located at 1840 Embarcadero, Oakland, California, which is also currently pending...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
[Re: ECF No. 17]
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Jeffrey Martins, an immigration attorney who represents persons seeking asylum in the United States, brought claims against the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”), Alejandro Mayorkas in his official capacity as Director of the USCIS, the United States Department of Home...
Views: 0
Page 93907
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Michael Hash brings this civil rights action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as several violations of state law. The case stems from the wrongful conviction of Hash for the 1996 murder of Thelma Scroggins. The plaintiff has filed a complaint alleging eight counts of prosecutorial and p...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING-IN-PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
[Re Docket No. 56]
Plaintiff alleges that defendants Kraft Foods Global, Inc., Cadbury Adams USA LLC, and Back to Nature Food Company (collectively “defendants”) violate California’s unfair completion law, Cal. Bus. & Prof.Code §§ 17200 et seq. (“UCL”) (counts 1-3), fair advertising law, id. § 17500 ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 04-128-15 (RMC)
)
WILLIAM H. SIMMONS, )
...
Views: 1
ORDER
(Motion to Stay Civil Proceedings (#73), Counter-Motion for Attorney Fees, Court Costs, and Sanctions (# 81), Motion for Sanctions (# 98), Emergency Motion for Protective Order (# 99), and Counter-Motion for Attorney Fees, Costs, and Sanctions (# 101)).
Before the court is defendants Central Washington Asphalt, Inc., Donald Hannon, James Wentland and Jerry Goldsmith’s Motion to Stay Civil P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This case arises from an insurance contract dispute between the Defendant Beazley Insurance Company, Inc. (“the Defendant”) and the Plaintiffs Intelligent Digital Systems, LLC (“IDS”); Russ & Russ PC Defined Benefit Pension Plan (“the Plan”); *453and Jay Edmond Russ (“Russ”), all individually and as assignees of Jack Jacobs, Robert Moe, Michael Ryan and Martin McF...
Views: 0
*1331
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiffs, Beckwith Electric Co., Inc. (“Beckwith Electric”), and Thomas R. Beckwith (“Beckwith”), seek a preliminary-injunction to enjoin the enforcement of a regulatory mandate that compels health care coverage that would include provision of any FDA-defined emergency contraceptive and other named alternatives. As grounds for relie...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
PATRICIA WHITE and LATRICIA HARDY, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. (“RMLS”) brought this action for copyright infringement against Defendant American Home Realty Network, Inc. (“AHRN”). RMLS now brings two motions before this Court. First, RMLS moves the Court for a finding of contempt against AHRN and AHRN’s Chief Executive Officer Jonathan Cardella for violations of the...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Baylor’s Motion to Reconsider, filed March 23, 2012. After careful consideration of the motion, briefing by the parties, record, and applicable law, the court grants Baylor’s Motion to Reconsider, vacates its March 15, 2012 memorandum opinion and order, and issues this amended memorandum opinion and order in its place. As herein explained...
Views: 0
ORDER
On this date, the Court considered Defendants James De La Cruz and Jose Gonzalez’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Deliberate Indifference Claim (docket no. 276) and Tsegaye Wolde’s Motion for Summary Judgment On Count Four (“Deliberate Indifference”) (docket no. 287), and the responses and replies thereto.1 After *711careful consideration, the Court grants the motions.
I. Background
Plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER
On this date, the Court considered the United States’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) claims for lack of jurisdiction (docket no. 64). The United States asserts that this Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ Twelfth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Causes of Action because they fall within the discretionary function and independent contractor exceptions to the...
Views: 0
Page 94142
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
PETER NG, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Ci...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case comes before the Court on Defendant Dent Design Hardware, Ltd.’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction [11] and Plaintiff Kason Industries, Inc.’s motion for jurisdictional discovery [18].
I. Background
Kason is a corporation specializing in refrigeration hardware. It is incorporated in New York and has its principal place of business in Newnan, Georgia. Kason is t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant Scott Booth to dismiss, or in the alternative, to stay proceedings. Plaintiff Canopius Insurance Inc. has responded to the motion and the court, having considered the memoranda of authorities, together with attachments, submitted by the parties, concludes that the motion should be granted.
On October 4, 2012,...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THE GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT The Government sued David Hamilton and Hamilton Properties for allegedly discharging fill material into a creek without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The Government has filed a motion requesting summary judgment on two crit*1272ical issues: (1) Whether the creek is a “water of the United...
Views: 0
OMNIBUS ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant CMI, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint With Prejudice (the “CMI Motion to Dismiss”) [DE 24], filed herein on March 19, 2013, and Defendants City of Delray Beach, Kenneth Brotz, and Matt Saraceni’s Motion to Dismiss Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (the “City et al. Motion to Dismiss”) [DE 30], filed here...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On March 25, 2013, the plaintiff Robert Aldrich (“Aldrich”), a prisoner in custody at MCI Shirley, in Shirley, Massachusetts, filed a civil rights action alleging: (1) a violation of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983; (2) a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2511 et seq. (prohibiting the unauthorized interception, disclosure, and use of wire, oral, or electronic communicat...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SD3, LLC, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
-------------------------------------------------------
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :
ex rel. HARRY BARKO : CASE NO. 1:05-CV-1276
:
Plaintiff-Relator, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
From January 2010 until she was terminated in June 2011, Plaintiff Ellen Gross was employed as a human-resources manager by Logistics Support, Inc., a contractor that specializes in providing logistics support services to the military. She alleges that shortly after announcing she was pregnant, LSI abruptly decided to terminate her, rather than moving forward with a previousl...
Views: 0
Page 94417
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Robert Smith (“Smith” or “Plaintiff’) appeals from a decision of Defendant Michael J. Astrue, the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”), denying him application for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-434. The Court has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). ...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Florida State University Flying High Circus has delighted summer audiences at Callaway Gardens with their exciting trapeze acts and tight wire walks since 1961. But, on June 27, 2010, the excitement extended just outside the big top when a runaway golf cart ran over Plaintiff Ann Roland and her minor son, pinning them against a metal pole of the circus tent. The golf cart had been ren...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND
This matter arose from Damion Canalichio’s participation in the affairs of a racketeering enterprise, the Philadelphia La Cosa Nostra (LCN) Family, from 1999 to 2012. He was charged by Third Superseding Indictment as follows:
COUNT 1 — RICO conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d);
COUNT 47 — Illegal electronic gambling device business in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Daniel and Paula Slemmer, on behalf of a similarly situated class, have sued two corporations, Barnhardt Manufacturing Co. (“Barnhardt”), and McGlaughlin Spray Foam Insulation, Inc. (“McGlaughlin”). Barhardt is the manufacturer of a type of home insulation known as spray polyurethane foam (“SPF”) and McGlaughlin is a certified installer of SPF. Plaintiffs a...
Views: 0
ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [# 20], Plaintiff Lawrence Mathis’s Response [# 22], and Defendants’ Reply [# 24]. Having reviewed the documents, the governing law, and the file as a whole, the Court now enters the following opinion and orders.
Background
As noted in this Court’s order denyi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Jay Stone, Frederick K. White, Frank L. Coconate, Denise Denison, Bill “Doc” White, and Howard Ray filed this action challenging the constitutionality of an Illinois statute, 65 ILCS 20/21 — 28(b), which requires Plaintiffs and other individuals seeking to be placed on the municipal ballot for mayor, city clerk, *889or city treasurer to obtain 12,500 signat...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [16]
The motion for summary judgment before the Court pertains to a lawsuit brought by Plaintiff Kimberly Chaney against her former employer, Defendant Eberspaecher North America for alleged violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant im...
Views: 0
Page 94555
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JIHAD DHIAB,
Petitioner,
v. Civil Action No. 05-1457 (GK)
BARACK OBAMA, et al.,
Respondents. :
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Petitioner, Jihad Dhiab, has filed...
Views: 0
Page 94556
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
KEVIN MICHAEL JONES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DICK ANTHONY HELLER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 08-1289 (JEB)
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this successor suit to D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff David Bonenberger, who is white, claims that he was not given the position of Assistant Director of the St. Louis Police Academy because of his race. Bonenberger has sued the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, the Board of Police Commissioners, six former and current members of the Board of Police Commissioners and three officers of the Police Department: C...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross motions for summary judgment. On December 19, 2012, Plaintiff International Union of Operating Engineers Local 148, AFL-CIO (the “Union”) filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 12) and on January 22, 2013 Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21). These motions are fully briefed and ready for disposition.
BACKGROUND...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On August 12, 2010, the Plaintiffs commenced this action. The case centers around an incident on January 11, 2010 during which the Plaintiff Henry Morales was shot by Suffolk County Police Officer Luis Mangual. Presently before the Court is a motion by the Plaintiffs Morales, Pedro Santos, and Joel Escobar seeking leave to amend the complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civi...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Travelers1 brought this action against Northrop Grumman2 seeking (1) .declarations that certain insurance policies require it neither to indemnify nor to defend Northrop Grumman against certain claims and (2) money damages for certain defense costs already incurred.3 Travelers also named Century4 as a nominal defendant.
Travelers filed the action in New York State Court on March...
Views: 0
Page 94634
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THERMAL DYNAMICS
INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 13-721 (CKK)
v.
SAFE HAVEN ENTERPRISES, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Bryan R. Mudrich worked in the Tire and Lube Express department of Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“WalMart”) for approximately one year before his termination in the spring of 2010. Mudrich alleges that he was wrongfully terminated because Wal-Mart engaged in gender discrimination in violation ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Motion for Summary Judgment.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (# 35)
COLLINGS, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. Introduction
This is an action for an alleged unlawful termination of a factory employee, Richard LeMar (“LeMar” or “the plaintiff’), who claims that his former employer, Independent Nail Company (“Independent Nail” or “the defendant”), un...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
I. INTRODUCTION
This action arises out of an agreement pursuant to which the plaintiff, Bryan Corporation (“Bryan”), agreed to purchase the pharmaceutical ingredient Tobramycin Sulfate (“TS”) from the defendant, ChemWerth, Inc. (“ChemWerth”). Bryan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment [45] and Motion to Strike Exhibits E, F, G, H and I to Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion to Strike”) [58]. Having considered the submissions of the parties, the record and the applicable law, the Court finds that the ...
Views: 0
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT AMETEK, INC’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. # 7) AND DENYING DEFENDANT AMETEK, INC’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (Doc. # 10)
Pending before the Court is Defendant Ametek, Inc.’s (hereinafter “Defendant” or “Ametek”) Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. 7.) and Defendant’s Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions (Doc. 10.). In the Motion to Dismiss, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On July 18, 2012, the Plaintiff Annette Lorber (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action by filing a Complaint against multiple defendants, which was thereafter reduced to the following: Jonathan Winston (“Winston”); Sheldon M. Ganz (“Ganz”); Sheldon M. Ganz, CPA, P.C.; Eva Tehrani (“Tehrani”); HSBC Bank USA, National Association (“HSBC Bank”); and HSBC Securities (...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Doreen Whethers (“Whethers” or “plaintiff’) commenced this action against defendants' Nassau Health Care Corporation (“NHCC”), Sharon Popper, Michael H. Mostow, Karl Kampe, and Petra Freese1 (collectively, “NUMC defen*371dants”), and defendant Richard Turan (“Turan”) asserting claims of race-based discrimination and retaliatory employment practices in violation of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
At issue in this Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)1 action is defendant’s threshold motion (i) to dismiss two of plaintiffs four asserted claims arising out of the termination of plaintiffs long-term disability benefits and (ii) to strike plaintiffs jury demand. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion to dismiss must be granted in part and denied in par...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On July 21, 2011, Plaintiff, Terry L. Herb, filed a complaint to quiet title in the *444Court of Common Pleas of York County, Pennsylvania against Defendant, Citimortgage, Inc., seeking an order quieting the title to the property at 333 Newcomer Road, Windsor, Pennsylvania and an order stating that a certain mortgage is not a lien on the property. (Doc. 1-2, pp. 3-26). Defendant remo...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs Friends of the Wild Swan and the Swan View Coalition filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) and preliminary injunction in this case on June 20, 2013. Plaintiffs filed a nearly identical motion seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in a related case, CV 12-59-M-DLC-JCL, on June 21, 2013. The motions request temporary injunctions of the ...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs Friends of the Wild Swan and the Swan View Coalition filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in this case on June 21, 2013. Plaintiffs filed a nearly identical motion seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in a related case, CV 12-29-M-DLC-JCL, on June 20, 2013. The motions request temporary injunctions of the Spotted Bear Ri...
Views: 0
Opinion bn Petition to Suspend Limitations 1. Introduction. The government has applied ex parte for an order to suspend the running of the limitations period for offenses that it has been investigating. The period will not be extended. The statute allows the government additional time to recover evidence from abroad when it has been asked for responsibly. The statute does not serve to extend the p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On August 5, 2011, Jermaine Randle filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to vacate or set aside his sentence based on Sixth Amendments claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Because I find that Randle’s counsel at the time of the Change of Plea and Sentencing hearing (“primary coun*343sel”) was ineffective when she failed to object to, move to withdraw o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the court are a supplemental motion to suppress evidence (ECF No. 94), a motion for discovery with respect to the telephone number used by the confidential informant (“CI”) in the present case (ECF No. 95), and a renewed motion for a hearing1 pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), filed by Defendant Thomas ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On November 27, 2012, Plaintiff Carol Novak filed this suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), alleging that Defendant Life Insurance Company of North America (“LINA”) incorrectly denied her claim for long-term disability benefits under a benefit plan (the “Plan”) offered by her former employer, Discover Financial...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
GILBERT ROMAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 12-1381 (EGS)
)
DEPARTMENT OF THE ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
HUNTER WILLIAMSON, )
)
and )
)
JOSHUA MICHAEL BRANHAM, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
GILBERT ROMAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 12-1370 (EGS)
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This action is now before the court on the motion for summary judgment filed by counterclaim plaintiff SE Property Holdings, LLC (SEPH), the response in opposition filed by counterclaim defendants Garrett Investments, LLC (Garrett), John B. Foley IV and Lauren M. Foley, and SEPH’s reply (docs. 50-52, 55, 56). Upon consideration, and for the reasons set forth herein, the motion for summary...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This motion for preliminary injunction concerns a public forum that has been at the center of public discourse in the State of Wisconsin since its completion in 1917: the massive Capitol rotunda. As explained in its official nomination for designation as a National Historic Landmark, which was granted on January 3, 2001:
The soaring rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol is desi...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action brought under the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution by plaintiffs, David Kucera and Vickie F. Forgety. The Plaintiffs’ initial complaint argued that, by contracting with Kingswood, the Defendants violated the teachers’ 1) First Amendment Establishment Clause rights under the United States Constitution...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending, and ready for resolution in this employment discrimination case are several motions: the motion for recusal filed by pro se Plaintiff Starsha Monet Sewell (ECF No. 23); the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Strayer University, Inc. (“Strayer”)1 (ECF No. 7); and the motion for summary judgment filed by Ms. Sewell (ECF No. 16). The court now rules pursuant t...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pro se plaintiff Debbie L. Parris (“plaintiff’ or “Parris”) brought this action against Acme Bus Corp. (“defendant”), alleging race discrimination, a hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). Defendant subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff The Bicycle Peddler, LLC, brings a complaint for copyright infringement against twelve unnamed “John Doe” defendants who, it alleges, unlawfully acquired and transferred Plaintiffs copyrighted motion picture “Trade of Innocents” (the “Movie”). Plaintiff alleges that it observed the defendants accessing the Movie using BitTorrent protocol, but it has thus far...
Views: 0
Page 95193
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification [Docket Entry # 133]. The Court held a hearing on this Motion on June 5, 2013. For the reasons explained below, the Motion for Class Certification is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs in this case were tieketholders for Super Bowl XLV held at Cowboys Stadium on February 6, 2011. The...
Views: 0
Page 95246
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
BRIAN S. HOOKER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Acti...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WISEY'S #1 LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
NIMELLIS PIZZERIA LLC;
Civil Action No. 12-cv-1612 (JDB)
MINELLIS PIZZERIA ENTERPRISES
LLC;
and
DAVAR ASHGRIZZADEH,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARK GORDON, :
:
Plaintiff, : Case No.: 1:13-mc-00021-RC
:
v. ...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order Before the Court is Defendant Keith Tolbert’s Motion for Modification of Sentence Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) filed on September 23, 2011. (Doc. # 162.) For the reasons set forth below, the motion is due to be DENIED. I. Introduction Keith Tolbert (“Mr. Tolbert”) is a prisoner in federal custody on convictions for violating 21 U.S.C. § 846 (Conspiracy to Distribute an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the “Motion for Summary Judgment” [Doc. No. 14] filed by defendant Professional Recovery Services, Inc. (“PRS”). The Court received plaintiffs response [Doc. No. 28] and defendant’s reply [Doc. No. 29]. The Court exercises its discretion to decide defendant’s motion without oral argument. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; L. Civ. R. 78.1. For the reasons...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the motion of Defendant The Adam Group, Inc. of Middle Tennessee (“PlayMaker”) for sanctions against Plaintiff Homecare CRM, LLC [113] pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.
As an initial matter, the Court notes that PlayMaker’s motion limits its request for sanctions to Homecare. The motion does not seek sanctions against Home-care’s counsel, who did not appe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On April 12, 2013, we entered an opinion and order, (Docket No. 57, 946 F.Supp.2d 244, 2013 WL 1531649 (D.P.R.2013)), granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1).1 (Docket No. 10.) We found that neither the writ of mandamus statute, nor § 1983, nor § 667 confers subject-matter jurisdiction over this case. (Docket No. 57.) We ...
Views: 0
*757MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION This matter is pending for consideration of Defendant Aliya Rae Adams’s motion to suppress evidence obtained from her residence pursuant to a state search warrant. [Record No. 49] The motion was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Robert E. Wier pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). The parties waived an evidentiary hearing. On July 3, 2013, the magistrate j...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
In a May 2, 2013 Order, the Court gave defendant Bruce Smith (hereinafter, “Smith”) leave to file a motion for partial summary judgment with respect to plain*593tiff M. Young’s claim that Smith, a former history teacher, is liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because he created a sexually hostile classroom environment that deprived M. Young, Smith’s former pupil, of the equal protection of t...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In this action, plaintiffs William Crafton and Meredith Benson (“the plaintiffs”) filed a complaint against the Law Firm of Jonathan B. Levine (“the law firm” or “the defendant”) alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). On May 1, 2013, the defendant filed a mot...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter was brought by Eugene Halecki, a retired consumer, to challenge the aggressive debt collection practices of the defendants. Defendant Empire Portfolios, Inc. purchased Halecki’s $79.89 credit card debt from his original creditor, and then referred it to defendant Cohen & Slamowitz, LLP, a debt collection law firm. Cohen & Slomowitz, LLP allegedly attempted to coll...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a case brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 207 (the “FLSA”), and parallel provisions of New York State law, seeking overtime compensation against the Defendant employers. Plaintiffs Noel Velasquez (“Velasquez”) and Carlos Rivera (“Rivera,” collectively “Plaintiffs”) commenced the action representing themselves, and seeking to represent a cla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendant International Down & Feather Testing Laboratory’s (“IDFL”) Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs claims of age and race/national origin discrimination, retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), and retaliation in violation of th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND FINAL ORDER
This case has been referred to the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge. on the parties’ consent pursuant to 28' Ü.S.C. § 636(c) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73. Before the Court is the pro se Plaintiffs, Nicole D. Evans (“Evans”), Motion for Default Judgment, ECF No. 72, and Kim Carmi’s (“Carmi”) “Request[s] to Cancel the Request of Default Judgment,’’ ECF Nos. 70-7...
Views: 0
*1009 ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray and the filed objections. After carefully considering these documents and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved an...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiffs Can-dance Kagan, Mary LaCoste, Joycelyn Cole, and Annette Watt (together, “Plaintiffs”), and defendant City of New Orleans (the “City”).1 For the following reasons, the City’s motion is GRANTED and Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs are tour guides in New Orleans, where they give walking...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Ambling Management Company, LLC, Elton Park, LLC and Stepelana Taylor have filed in this cause a Motion to Dismiss on Grounds of Insufficient Process, Insufficient Service of Process, Lack of Declaratory Authority and Abstention. Plaintiff Colony Insurance Company (Colony) has responded in opposition to the motion. The court, having considered the memoran...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Plaintiffs Andrea Derks Fagan and George D. Fagan’s (the “Fagans” or “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Default Judgment,1 wherein Plaintiffs move the Court for a default judgment pursuant to Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure against Lawrence Nathan Associates, Inc. (“Defendant”) for engaging in allegedly improper and unlawful debt collection practices ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This appeal arises from a dispute over whether condominium assessments and fees incurred during the pendency of a bankruptcy proceeding, after the filing of a Chapter 11 petition and prior to the case’s conversion to a Chapter 7 proceeding, are dischargeable debts. The bankruptcy court held that such assessments and fees were not dischargeable. This Court affirms th...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING WRIT OF HABEAS Petitioner Darryl Whitley seeks a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that his trial counsel was constitutionally deficient in failing to request that the trial court admit into evidence the recantation of one of the prosecution’s witnesses. Whitley presented the same claim to the New York courts, which held in 2007 and again in 2009 that Whitley’s trial ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
MADIEU WILLIAMS d/b/a, )
M. Williams Ventures, )
)
Judgment Creditor, )
)
v. ) Ci...
Views: 1
Memorandum Opinion
This matter is before the court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint, as well as *713Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint. On July 7, 2011, 2011 WL 2670075, I dismissed Plaintiffs first amended complaint, and Plaintiff appealed to the Fourth Circuit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed that decision in part and vacated in part,...
Views: 0
ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION......................................................1086
II. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY..................................1086
A. Enterprise’s Motion................................................1087
B. Plaintiffs’Motion..................................................1087
III. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION....................................1087
IV. SU...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for review in this insurance coverage dispute are two motions filed by Plaintiff Nautilus Insurance Company (“Nautilus”): (1) a motion *677for default judgment against Defendants REMAC America, Inc. (“REMAC”) and Mark V. Soresi (ECF No. 22); and (2) a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 4). The issues have been fully briefed, and the court now rules...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this contract case, which is before this Court on consent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), plaintiff Kasper Global Collection & Brokers, Inc. (“Plaintiff’)1 has moved for summary judgment on its claims of breach of contract, account stated, and goods sold and received, or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment on certain of those claims. (Dkt. 48.) Defendants Global ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF STANDING
(Docket No. 38)
Plaintiff CopyTele, Inc. has filed a patent infringement action against Defendants E Ink Holdings, Inc. and. E Ink Corporation (collectively, “E. Ink”). According to CopyTele, it is the sole owner of all rights, title, and interest in three patents (the ’935 patent; the ’810 patent, and the ’488 patent), see Compl. ...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO STRIKE AND DISMISS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1036
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY..............................................1036
III. RELEVANT FACTS....................................................1037
IV. DISCUSSION..........................................................1038
A. Are Lincoln’s Counterclaims to Open So...
Views: 0
Page 95742
ORDER ASSESSING TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF, DISMISSING ACTION WITH PREJUDICE, AND DENYING MOTION IN LIMINE AS MOOT
Order Dismissing Action, with Prejudice
I. Background
Plaintiff Ricky W. James (“Plaintiff’), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 12, 2008. This action for damages is proceeding ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Kym Pardini (“Plaintiff’) brings this putative class action in connection with Defendant Unilever United States, Ine.’s (“Defendant”) marketing of I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter! Spray. Plaintiff alleges that the product is deceptively marketed as having “0 fat” and “0 calories,” since it in fact contains 771 calories and 82 grams of f...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Mandi Swan, Denise Burns, and Felicia Bradley (collectively “Plaintiffs”) are parents of children who are enrolled in special education programs and attend the Chicago public schools slated for closure before the commencement of the 2013-2014 school year. They have sued the Board of Education of the City of Chicago (“Board”), Barbara Byrd-Bennett, the Chi...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANTHONY G. WHITE, SR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-2045 (RJL)
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Lawrence M. Yacubian (“Plaintiff’) bring this suit against the United States (“Defendant”) for malicious prosecution and abuse of process under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). Defendant has moved to dismiss both counts. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [# 17] is ALLOWED.
II. Factual Background1
Plaintiff was a scallop fisherman and ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RAMSES DAVIS )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. ...
Views: 0
Page 95904
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NATIONAL NURSES UNITED, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Crim. Action No. 13-0170-1 (ABJ)
)
ENDEJA HASSAN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Sherise McDaniel, Marshetta Ross, and Frances and Alphonso Newman (collectively “Plaintiffs”) are parents of children who attend the Chicago public schools slated for closure before the commencement of the 2013-2014 school year. They have sued the Board of Education of the City of Chicago (“Board”), Barbara Byrd-Bennett, the Chief Executive Officer of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs Donovan and Nancy Walker initiated this suit against members of the Boston Police Department for alleged police misconduct. They claim that officers conducted an illegal search of their home and used excessive force against Mr. Walker. Before the court are eight separate motions to dismiss the Walkers’ Third Amended Complaint [# 60]. For the reasons below, ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Defendant Tabari Facen was indicted in a four-count indictment with drug trafficking and firearm-related offenses. Count 1 charged the possession of cocaine base with the intent to distribute. Count 2 charged him with using the premises at 303 Lakeview Park, Rochester, New York, to manufacture, distribute and/or use a controlled substance. Count 3 charged him with possession o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER1
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of Defendants Larry Goldstone and Clarence G. Simmons and Memorandum of Law in Support, filed May 21, 2012 (Doc. 35)(“Goldstone & Simmons MTD”); (ii) the Defendant Jane Starrett’s Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support, filed May 21, 2012 (Doc. 36)(“Starrett MTD”...
Views: 0
Page 96037
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MSHAIRI JONATHAN MILLER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
Before the Court is plaintiff Ron Swanson’s (“Swanson”) informative motion submitted in response to the Court’s order to show cause that the Court has in person-am jurisdiction over out-of-state defendant Kelsey Coffeen (“Coffeen”). For the reasons discussed below, the Court finds that it lacks personal jurisdiction over defendant Coffeen, and, accordingly, plaintiff Swanson...
Views: 0
SHORT ORDER On June 27, 2013, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order granting a motion by the Plaintiff Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC to dismiss the third counterclaim by the Defendant Marius Fortelni seeking an award of attorneys’ fees for its alleged “bad faith” disclaimer of insurance coverage. 951 F.Supp.2d 385, 2013 WL 3283464 (E.D.N.Y.2013). In that Memorandum and Order, for purposes of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on (i) the Plaintiffs Motion in Limine to Exclude Affidavit of the Honorable F. Kenneth Eichwald and Any and All Testi*1270mony of F. Kenneth Eichwald and any and all Testimony of F. Kenneth Eichwald Related Thereto, filed December 6, 2012 (Doc. 78)(“Motion in Limine”); and (ii) the Plaintiffs Motion in Limine to Preclude Defendant...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Individual School Defendant Melanie Romero’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I of the Second Amended Complaint Based Upon Qualified Immunity, filed Nov. 13, 2012 (Doc. 113)(“Motion for Summary Judgment”). The Court held a hearing on December 20, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether the personal involvement of Defen...
Views: 0
Page 96172
OMNIBUS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND POSTURE
This is primarily a breach of contract action brought by a Kentucky corporation, Plaintiff Consortium Companies, Incorporated (“Consortium USA”), its wholly-owned Chinese subsidiary, Guangzhou Consortium Display Product, Ltd. (“Consortium China”), and ' several individual guarantors1 (“the Guarantors”) against Defendant PNC ...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
I. INTRODUCTION
The matter is presently before the Court upon the Order and Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #50), Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Third-Party Complaint (Doc. #35), and Plaintiffs Motion for Order for Oral Arguments on Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Third-Party Complaint (Doc. # 44). In her R & *7...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
This action arises from a homeowner’s default on a home loan and the resulting mortgage foreclosure. In 2004, plaintiff James Biltcliffe and his wife purchased a home in Bridgewater, Massachusetts. As part of the transaction, he and his wife granted a mortgage on the house to the lender, which was ultimately assigned to de...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CAROLINA ZALDUONDO )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 96327
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MILLENNIUM SQUARE RESIDENTIAL )
ASSOCIATION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN PETROLEUM TANKERS
PARENT, LLC,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1165 (CKK)
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 7, 2008, Petitioner Joseph Paul Young (“Young”) was indicted in the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota on three counts of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). United States v. Young, CR-08-40151-RAL, Trial Dor. I.1 Young was tried by ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner Santos Carillo-Morales’s (“Peti*799tioner”) Petition to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Ms Sentence Pursuant to 28 U:S.C. § 2255 (2012). (Doc. 246.) TMs case concerns Petitioner’s interaction ■'with his attorney prior to plea negotiations before he was convicted for conspiracy to commit murder and aggravated assault in aid o...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
I. INTRODUCTION
A pretrial conference and evidentiary hearing occurred in' the above-captioned matter on June 5, 2013. Defendant Devonn Deshea Kinsey was present, represented by Rebecca L. Pennell. Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexander C. Ekstrom appeared on behalf of the U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO). At the hearing, the Court orally ruled on several pend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Prowess, Inc. (“Prowess”) sued Ray-Search Laboratories, AB (“RaySearch”) and others1 (collectively, the “Defendants”) for patent infringement. A claim construction hearing was held on December 14, 2012 (“Hr’g”). Pending are the Defendants’ motions for leave to file amended answers to the second amended complaint, and counterclaims, and to supplement the record in support of -th...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Arbela Technologies Corp.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (“Defendant’s Motion”), filed April 3, 2013. Clerk’s No. 2. Fastpath, Inc. (“Plaintiff’) resisted the Motion on April 22, 2013. Clerk’s No. 3. Defendant replied on May 6, 2013. Clerk’s No. 6. The Motion is fully submitted.
*973I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In June 2012, Plaintiff, an Io...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Alfred Seiple brings suit against Defendant Progressive Northern Insurance Company (“Progressive”) on his own behalf and on behalf of a purported class, claiming that Progressive wrongfully denied him stacked uninsured/underinsured motorist benefits. Although he explicitly waived stacked coverage — and paid accordingly reduced premiums — when he originally bought his motorcyc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before this Court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia. Appellant Sam J. Alberts, the trustee for the Doctors Community Hospital Corporation Liquidating Trust, appeals from the final judgment of U.S. Bankruptcy Judge S. Martin Teel. In bankruptcy court, Alberts had initiated an adversary proceeding against, inter alia, ap...
Views: 0
Page 96650
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________
)
ROBERT E. FALKENSTEIN, JR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 12-2000(EGS)
)
...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff Paul Armbruster (“Armbruster”) has sued various individuals and entities for events largely arising out of the forfeiture of stock options granted to his ex-wife during her employment by Defendant WageWorks, Inc. (“WageWorks”). All the defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiffs claims. The complaint will be dismissed and Armbruster will be given one opportunity to amend. BACKGROUN...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment [Doc. No. 24 and 25]. I. Factual Background1 This case concerns the State of Georgia’s runoff absentee voting scheme and *1321the federal laws that remedy the historical disenfranchisement of American citizens serving and living abroad who have been unable to vote because of logistical barriers. On June 2...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 06-0152 (PLF)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 10-0133 (PLF)
)
FLOYD CLARK...
Views: 0
Page 96865
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; APPENDICES “A” & “B”
The Hawaii Constitution specifies the use of permanent residents as the relevant population base in apportioning state legislative seats. In a 2012 decision, the Hawaii Supreme Court laid out the appropriate method for determining permanent residents by ex...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Although it has roots in English equity jurisprudence, the modern form of federal class actions took shape largely after the 1966 amendment to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and is still evolving in unfamiliar, unpredictable ways. In particular, the recent attempts by Congress and the Supreme Court to curtail what they perceive as vexatious, even ex*635tortionate cla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Defendant is charged with committing wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. Pending before the Court is defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained during a warrantless search of his vehicle following his arrest.
I. Background
A. Defendant’s Arrest and Search of his Vehicle
On or about May 25, 2011, d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs bring this action challenging the enforceability of 700 C.M.R. § 3.07 et seq., which are regulations of outdoor advertising recently promulgated by defendant Massachusetts Department of Transportation (“MassDOT”).
I. Background
Plaintiffs Van Wagner Communications, LLC (‘VWC”) and Van Wagner Boston, LLC (“VWB”) are New York entities. VWC is the fourth largest nationa...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
in re BLACK FARMERS D;SCRLMINATION ) Mis¢. No. cls-051 1 (PLF)
LITIGATIoN 3
J
orrNioN
This matter is before the Court on class counsel's updated motion for an award of
attomeys' fees and expenses The Settlement Agreement that was approved by the Court
following a Fairness Hearing provides that class counsel will receive an award equal ...
Views: 0
UNI'I`ED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED sTATEs oF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 12-cv-870 (RJL)
)
YoUNEs MUBARAK ALRASHEEI)I, ) F f [_ § §
a.k.a., YOUNIS MUBARAK SALEH )
) .NL 1 f DB
Defendant. )
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
,fz/_ Courts for the District of Columb|a
MEMoRANDUM oPlNloN
(Juiy 2013) [Dkt. #9]
The United States ("plaintiff" or "the...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendants Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo) move to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion to dismiss (# 25) and request for judicial notice (# 28) are GRANTED. This action is dismissed, with prejudice.
BACKGROUND
Except where otherwise noted, the following facts are taken from plaintiffs’...
Views: 5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 09-0114 (PLF)
)
WILLIE D. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 10-0114 (PLF)
)
LONNIE JER...
Views: 0
Page 97107
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brings this enforcement action under Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 against attorney Virginia K. Sourlis. Both parties have moved for summary judgment on liability. At oral argument on November 16, 2012, I granted the SEC’s motion for summary judgment for aiding and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER1 After eight years of litigation, 27 days of trial to the bench on the issue of liability, and extensive post-trial briefing, this case boils down to four basic questions: (1) Do the named plaintiffs have standing? (2) Did the 2004 student assignment . plan by defendant School District U-46 (the “District”) discriminate against Minority Students2 by concentrating infer...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
HAZEL HAWKINS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. ) ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AMERICAN CHEMISTRY
COUNCIL, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1156 (JEB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 1
OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I. INTRODUCTION
This action within the Court’s admiralty jurisdiction arises out of a collision on July 2, 2008 in Block Island/Rhode Island Sound between the United States Coast Guard Cutter MORRO BAY and the ferry boat BLOCK ISLAND, owned and operated by Interstate Navigation Company. When the collision occurred, the BLOCK ISLAND was engaged on...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This civil action is before the court for consideration of “Defendant Tennessee Cancer Specialists, PLLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment” [doc. 18]. Plaintiff has filed a response in opposition [docs. 23, 24], and defendant has submitted a reply [doc. 30]. Oral argument is unnecessary, and the motion is ripe for the court’s determination.
Plaintiff has filed suit for alleged vi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Through this action, Plaintiff, Rhett Gavin Stuart (“Stuart”), seeks recovery for injuries he sustained in a forklift rollover accident. At the time of the accident, July 9, 2010, the forklift was owned by Stuart’s employer, the City of Lancaster, South Carolina (“City”). The forklift was previously owned by Defendant, Springs Industries, Inc. (“Springs”), b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff, Carol L. Robinson, brought this action against defendant, Patrick R. Donahoe, in his capacity as Postmaster General, for claims of prior and ongoing employment discrimination and retaliation based on her gender, age, and past conduct of bringing employment-related claims against the United States Po...
Views: 0
Page 97335
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the statute of limitations. While Plaintiffs might have had some legitimate claims if they had been timely raised, the delay in bringing their claims is fatal. For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be granted.
I. BACKGROUND
Dublin Eye Associat...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS MICHAEL ZEZULAK, JUST TACOS PEARL CITY, INC., AND JUST TACOS HAWAII KAI, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
I. INTRODUCTION
This case arises from a 2008 franchise agreement (“Agreement”) between Defendants Michael Zezulak (“Zezulak”), Just *1203Tacos Pearl City, Inc., and Just Tacos Hawaii Kai, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) and Plaintif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Walter Raposo and Joseph Mingolla (“plaintiffs”) are former truck drivers for defendant Garelick Farms, LLC (“defendant” or “Garelick”), a dairy distribution business. Plaintiffs’ claims, on their own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, arise from Garelick’s policy of automatically deducting 30 minutes from drivers’ time cards for mandatory, unpaid mea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This cause is before the court on the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants on July 19, 2012. (Doc. 86). In that motion, all remaining defendants,1 the Madison County School Board, Ronnie J. Blair, Jeanne Dunaway, and Teresa G. Terrell, seek judgment in their favor and dismissal of plaintiffs various claims against them under Title IX of the Education Amendments...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE
Before the Court is Defendant Face-book, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “Faeebook”) Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), filed January 10, 2013. (ECF No. 29.) For the reasons that follow, the Motion is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
This case concerns Defendant Face-book’s alleged infringement of United States Patent No. 6,628,314 (the “'314 patent”). (E...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO TRANSFER
Before the Court is Defendant Groupon, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “Groupon”) Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), filed January 10, 2013. (ECF No. 21.) For the reasons that follow, the Motion is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
This case concerns Defendant Groupon’s alleged infringement of United States Patent No. 6,628,314 (the “'314 patent”). (ECF No. 1.) ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
MARCUS NELSON, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
LA TRICIA HARDY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Ci...
Views: 0
Page 97510
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
YASSIN MUHIDDIN AREF, et al.,
Civil Action No. 10-539 (BJR)
Plaintiffs,
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON
v.
...
Views: 0
Page 97512
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
-------------------------------------------------------
:
HERMAN E. LANE, : Case No. 1:05-cv-01414
:
Plaintiff :
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant, Tracfone Wireless, Inc., has moved this Court to stay enforcement of a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals mandate and judgment dated June 26, 2013. The amount of that judgment against Tracfone is approximately $5,000,000. The current judgment and mandate of the Sixth Circuit affirmed the judgment of this Court. Tracfone argues that this Court should issue a stay...
Views: 0
Page 97541
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
. Petitioner Pick Quick Food, Inc. (“Pick Quick” or “petitioner”) filed an action in New York State Supreme Court, County of Nassau seeking an interim and permanent stay of the arbitration that respondent United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 342 (the “Union” or “respondent”) requested on behalf of grievant Anthony Colarusso (“Colarusso” or “grievant”). The state court gr...
Views: 1
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Northern Insurance Company of New York’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. #38), filed on January 16, 2013. Defendant National Fire & Marine Insurance Company filed an Opposition (Doc. # 45) on February 14, 2013. Plaintiff filed a Reply (Doc. # 47) on February 25, 2013.
Also before the Court is Defendant National Fire & Marine Insurance Compan...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This case arises out of an arrangement — whether it was a “contract” or not is one of the principal issues in this case— between plaintiff John Haughton and de*481fendants, Greater Rochester Independent Practice Association (“GRIPA”), and Cognisight, LLC. Defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Cecil D.B. King, Jr. and his siblings (“Plaintiffs”) seek payment with respect to five Certificates of Deposit (“CDs”) they obtained from their father’s estate. Each CD is dated July 27, 1976, in the face amount of $1,000,000, issued by the First National Bank of Chicago (“FNBC”), and made payable to “Bearer” (“Bearer CDs”). In July 1977, the CDs matured and the ful...
Views: 0
Page 97732
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The plaintiff, Robert G. Wing, as Receiver for VesCor Capital Corp. and numerous other related entities controlled by Val Southwick and VesCor,1 moves this court for summary judgment, arguing that the undisputed facts show that payments made by VesCor to Christopher D. Layton and Layton’s affiliated entities were fraudu...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On February 4, 2013, Canatelo, LLC (“Plaintiff’) brought this suit for patent infringement against AXIS Communications AB (“AXIS AB”)1 and AXIS Communications, Inc. (“Defendant”). (Docket No. 1.) Plaintiff seeks to prevent and enjoin Defendant from infringing and profiting from two of its patents. (See id. ¶ 1.) Jurisdiction is premised on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). (See i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The following facts are drawn from the parties’ pleadings for purposes of this order and do not constitute the findings of the Court.
The Defendant Mountain Tobacco Company, d/b/a/ King Mountain Tobacco Company Inc. (“King Mountain”) is a corporation formed under the laws of the Yakama Nation of Indians and is engaged in the business of manufacturing, selling, tra...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health Care System, Inc. (“plaintiff’ or “North Shore”) brought this action seeking an order of this Court to remand the action to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau (“Nassau Supreme”), where the action originally was initiated. Defendant Local 812 Health Fund (“Local 812”) removed the case (with the consent o...
Views: 1
Page 97788
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
Before the Court is the motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(c) (“Rule 12(c)”) filed by defendant Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (“Sedgwick”). (Docket No. 39.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES defendant Sedgwick’s motion.
I. BACKGROUND
A. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In its complaint, plaintiff Albandoz al...
Views: 0
Page 97817
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Against Harry Deakins (Document 179), Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Against Kay Deakins (Document 181), attached exhibits, memoranda in support and in opposition, and the replies. By Standing Order (Document 4) entered on December 21, 2010, this action was referred to the Honorable R. Cla...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Spirit Airlines, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 17]. Petitioner William Tate, an airliner captain, filed this *1361action seeking review of a determination by the Spirit Airlines Pilots’ System Board of Adjustment (“Board”) affirming Respondent Spirit Airlines, Inc.’s decision to terminate Ta...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on an appeal from the bankruptcy court’s December 28, 2012 Order Granting Final Judgment for Defendant and Memorandum Opinion Underlying the Judgment. This Court has jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1) and Fed. R. Bankr.P. 8001. For the reasons stated herein, the bankruptcy court’s judgment is reversed.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This appe...
Views: 1
ORDER
Presently before the court is plaintiff Liberty Insurance Underwriters Inc.’s motion for summary judgment. (Doc. # 20).1 Defendant Patrick Dillon responded (doc. #32), and plaintiff replied (doc. # 33).
Also before the court is defendant Dillon’s counter-motion to stay. (Doc. # 34). Plaintiff responded (doc. # 35), defendant Dillon replied (doc. # 36).
Last, before the court is plaintiffs m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On May 24, 2013, the Court ordered the parties to submit simultaneous briefs discussing whether subject matter jurisdiction exists. (Docket No. 69.) Two jurisdictional issues have been raised. First, whether the forum selection clause signed by Victor Martinez-Valdez (“Mr. Martinez”) upon decedent Arquidiana Arvelo-Segura (“Ms. Arvelo”)’s admission to the hospital on February...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Now before the court for decision is the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or alternative motion for a more definite statement pursuant to Rule 12(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, filed in the above-captioned action by defendant, Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation. Plaintiffs, Rhonda Beshears, Andrea Compton, Dia...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Denise Jarrett brings this proposed class action against Defendants Sa-nyo Manufacturing Corporation (Sanyo), Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores Arkansas, L.L.C. (collectively, Wal-Mart), alleging the Defendants designed, manufactured, distributed or sold defective 42" and 46" Sanyo plasma televisions.1 Plaintiff filed her action in the Circuit Court of Pulas...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 22)
Before the Court is Defendant BAE Systems, Inc. (“BAE”) Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 22.) Plaintiff filed a response (ECF No. 25) and BAE filed a reply (ECF No. 26). The Court held a hearing on March 27, 2013. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss.
INTRODUCTION
This is a qui tam action brought by ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises out of a dispute between Plaintiff WIHO, LLC, a professional ice hockey club, and its former employee, Defendant Matt Hubbauer. Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. 6). For the reasons set forth below, the Court denies Defendant’s motion.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
A. The Collective B...
Views: 0
ORDER This Court has considered Plaintiffs’ Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction *1097and Plaintiffs’ related requests for declaratory and injunctive relief set forth in Count VII of Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. The issues that Plaintiffs’ Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction presents for this Court’s determination are questions of law. The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ Second Motio...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SECOND MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND TO CONDUCT ADDITIONAL CLASS DISCOVERY
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a second motion for class certification and to engage in additional class-related discovery (Dkt. # 103). The court has considered the motion, all submissions filed in support and opposition th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The Plaintiff, Danbury Buildings, Inc. (“DBI”) brings this diversity action against the Defendant, Union Carbide Corporation (“UCC”), raising claims of breach of contract in connection with a written lease agreement. Additionally, DBI seeks a declaratory judgment as to reimbursement for costs incurred by DBI with respect to environmental reporting, investigation, ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. )
) Criminal No. 05-110
VERNARD MITCHELL, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
RICHARD W. BURKES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 12-321 (EGS)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS HOSPITAL
AUTHORITY, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 11-cv-1382 (BJR)
v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS'
...
Views: 0
ORDER Presently pending before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Eric K. Shinseki, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (the “VA”). [Dkt. 31.] Plaintiff Dovey Hatchett alleges that her federal employer, the VA discriminated against her and that she suffered a hostile work environment because she is African American.1 [Dkt. 1.] The VA moves for summary judgment, claiming ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises out of the April 20, 2010 Maeondo well blowout and the resulting explosion on the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon which killed 11 people; injured dozens of others; and set off a chain of events culminating in 87 days of crude oil spilling directly into deepwater Gulf of Mexico. The Maeondo well was a joint venture among BP Exploration & Production Inc. (toge...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, Court Authorized Notice, and Tolling of Statute of Limitations (Doc. No. 14) and Defendants’ Motion for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Class and Collective First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 44). For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants in part and denies in part the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Remand (Doc. # 15) filed on April 29, 2013. Defendant filed a Response (Doc. # 17) on May 13, 2013. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted. Plaintiff filed a one count Complaint in state court asserting a claim under the Florida Whistleblowers Act, Fla. Stat. § 448.102. (Doc. #2.) The timely Notice of R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On October 3, 2012, the Plaintiff Joseph Scott Bebry (the “Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the Defendants ALJAC *175LLC, a Domestic Limited Liability Company (“ALJAC”), and Aran Verma d/b/a Rangmahal Indian Cuisine (“Verma,” and collectively, the “Defendants”). The Plaintiff asserts causes of action for declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U....
Views: 0
ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Plaintiff Texas County and District Retirement System (TCDRS)’s Motion to Remand [# 10], Defendants Wexford Spectrum Fund, L.P., Wexford Spectrum Advisors, L.P., Wexford Capital, L.P., and Wexford GP, L.L.C. (collectively, Wexford)’s Response [# 17], and TCDRS’s Reply [# 18]; and Wexford’s...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case is before the Court on defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended and Consolidated Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws [docket ##-35, 36] and Lead Plaintiffs Motion to Strike or Disregard Portions of Defendants’ Reply in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [# 43]. On April 29, 2013, the Court held oral argument on the motions and to...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
1. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs in this putative class action allege that banks, credit card companies, and debt collectors obtained thousands of judgments against debtors through false affidavits, misleading evidence, and other improper litigation tactics.1 They request injunctive, declaratory, and collateral relief based on: (i) the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ...
Views: 0
Page 98510
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOHN N. KANGETHE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-2209 (JDB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff John Kangethe, proceeding pro se, brings this suit ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Currently pending before the Court are Defendant Smiths Detection, Inc.’s *658(“Smiths”) Rule 50(b) motion for judgment as a matter of law and Rule 59(a) motion for a new trial.1 At the conclusion of a week-long jury trial, the civil jury empaneled in this case reached a unanimous verdict, concluding that: (1) defendant Smiths infringed on all asserted claims of U.S. Patent No...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Introduction
In this copyright infringement action involving thumbnail images of nude models, defendants move for partial summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the motion is Granted.
*1150Statement
1. The Parties.
Plaintiff Perfect 10, Inc., a California corporation, creates copyrighted adult entertainment products, including photographs. Perfect ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. The *1009Plaintiff, Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”), asks the Court to compel the United States Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) to release records concerning the export of devices, software, or technology primarily used to intercept or block communications. EFF’s request i...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR STAY
[Re Docket No. 34, 38]
Keith Charles Knapp, the trustee of the purported California Home Loans Profit Sharing Plan (“Plan”), and Therese Lavoie, a participant in the purported Plan, bring this lawsuit for “Injunctive and Other Appropriate Equitable Relief and Declaratory Relief’ against...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
SHAKER AAMER (ISN 239), )
NABIL HADJARAB (ISN 238), )
AND AHMED BELBACHA (ISN 290), )
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MAE HORSEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil No. 12-1457 (JDB)
SETH D. HARRIS, Acting Secretary, Department
of Labor,
Def...
Views: 0
ORDER & OPINION
Plaintiffs Sarkissian Mason, Inc. (“Sarkissian”) and AutoMatic, Inc. (“AutoMatic”) bring this action against Defendant Enterprise Holdings, Inc (“Enterprise”), alleging that Plaintiffs brought a proprietary business proposal to Enterprise, which Enterprise allegedly misappropriated for its own use. Plaintiffs allege five claims against Defendant: breach of a nondisclosure agreem...
Views: 1
ORDER ON CHOICE OF LAW
After a federal jury awarded Michael Dinan damages of $70,331.93 in quantum *46meruit in a lawsuit he brought against his former employer, Alpha Networks, Inc., the parties filed post-trial briefs, requesting the Court to (1) determine whether Maine or California law triggered wage payment penalty provisions and would entitle Mr. Dinan to an increased damages award and atto...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER By Order dated May 26, 2006, the Court denied the petition of Antonio Mallet (“Mallet”) for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Mallet v. Miller, 432 F.Supp.2d 366 (S.D.N.Y.2006). Mallet subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration which the Court denied. See Mallet v. Miller, 438 F.Supp.2d 276 (S.D.N.Y.2006). Shortly thereafter, Mallet moved for recon...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Before the court is plaintiffs’ motion for temporary restraining order, seeking an *860order from the court enjoining the enforcement of Section 1 of 2013 Wisconsin Act 37, which requires that physicians who provide abortion services to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic. The enactment of this legislation was precipitous: the legislation...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Shareholder Joseph P. Ausikaitis (“plaintiff’) filed the instant suit on September 19, 2012 against eleven individuals (“defendants”) who are executive officers (“officers”) and/or members of the board of directors (the “Board”) of Masimo Corporation (“Masimo”). Masimo is named as nominal defendant. Plaintiff brings derivative claims against defendants for alleg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the court are cross-motions for summary judgment filed by the parties. Each of the claims in this case arises out of defendants’ refusal to defend or indemnify plaintiff on a claim for which the plaintiff asserts the insurance policies in question should provide coverage.
As previously set forth by the court, the facts relevant to this ease began before 1900. T...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Presently before this Court is Defendant Pravin Patel’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings seeking dismissal of Plaintiff Barbara Young-Gibson’s complaint. (Docket No. 47). This is Defendant’s second motion seeking such relief. This Court previously granted Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on August 8, 2011, 2011 WL 3475451. (Docket No. 33). Pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On September 11, 2012 the Plaintiff Tressa Kurian (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action against North Shore University Hospital (“North Shore”) and Galia Bagsadarova (“Bagsadarova”). In the Original Complaint, the Plaintiff brought the following three causes of action: (1) an age discrimination claim pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1984 (“Title ...
Views: 0
*189
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The central question before this Court is whether a former franchisee of a Caribbean-style fast-food chain should be preliminarily enjoined from operating a Caribbean-style fastfood restaurant within the same vicinity of the former franchise and other like franchise locations.
Plaintiffs Golden Krust Patties, Inc. and Golden Krust Franchising, Inc., d/b/a Golden Krust ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On December 21, 2011, plaintiff Kenneth Herbst (“plaintiff’) initiated this action against the United States Postal Service (“USPS”), Patrick R. Donahoe (“Dona-hoe”), David C. Williams (‘Williams”), Danita DeVaul (“DeVaul”), and John Doe and/or Jane Doe (“Doe”) (collectively, “defendants”), alleging constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and causes of action for in...
Views: 2
OPINION Petitioner Patrick Smith (“Mr. Smith” or “Petitioner”) has petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, opposed by respondent Superintendent Brian Fischer (“Mr. Fischer” or the “Respondent”). The instant matter centers on the testimony of an informant in Petitioner’s criminal trial. The issue presented here is whether Petitioner’s trial counsel provided ineffective ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
I. History
Sophia Arce was delivered to Agueda Galvan (“Plaintiffs”) on September 29, 2010, by Dr. Brock at Doctors Medical Center. As a result of negligent examina*1183tion, Plaintiff Galvan had to be induced into labor more than five weeks before her due date; Plaintiff Arce sustained birth injuries including respiratory system...
Views: 0
*1193ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS Before the Court is a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons stated below, the motion is GRANTED IN PART. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Seoul Laser Dieboard System Co., Ltd. is a South Korean corporation in the machine tooling b...
Views: 0
Page 99468
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendants Suzann Griswold-Bailey, Ronald Brockhouse, Donald Gaetz, and Jim Winters’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 49). That motion seeks judgment for those Defendants on the issues of exhaustion of administrative remedies and qualified immunity. Defendants Doctors Fahim, Feinerman, and Fuentens have no pending motions. On Defendants’ claim of failur...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. # 18)
Plaintiff Alvin Mathews, an Ohio resident, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“NPC”), alleging that NPC’s drug Aredia® caused him to develop osteonecrosis of the jaw (“ONJ”), a painful and debilitating m...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ERIC OLSON and NILS OLSON,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1924 (JEB)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 1953, CIA employees slipped LSD int...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court now considers a variety of motions concerning the Louisville-South*991ern Indiana Ohio River Bridges Project (the “Project”). In general, Defendants, the Federal Highway Administration (“FHA”), the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (“Kentucky”), the Indiana Department of Transportation (“Indiana”, and collectively with Kentucky, the “States”) and various indiv...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS CLAIM FOR BREACH OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
On March 28, 2013, Plaintiffs Christopher and Joni O’Keefe commenced this diversity action by filing a complaint against Defendant Allstate Indemnity Company (“Allstate”). Plaintiffs alleged three causes of action: (1) breach of the insurance contract at issue,...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over the Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), or, in the alternative, to dismiss or transfer for improper venue pursuant to Fed.R.CivJP. 12(b)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The Complaint alleges violations of federal and New Jers...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(July 17, 2013)
Before the Court is the motion of the plaintiff, Shorn Joseph, for attorneys’ fees and costs.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This case arises out of an employment dispute between the plaintiff, Shorn Joseph (“Joseph”), and the defendants, the Government of the Virgin Islands (the “Government”), the Legislature of the Virgin Islands (the “Legislature”), and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff, who was an inmate in a state prison facility, alleges that defendants violated his state and federal civil rights while he was in their custody. Defendants now move to dismiss several of his claims against them.
I. Background
The following allegations are drawn from the Complaint and accepted as true for the purpose of resolving the pending motion to dismiss:
On Febr...
Views: 0
Page 99739
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff alleges that defendant, his union, violated several federal labor laws when it converted from an exclusive to a non-exclusive hiring hall and denied him certain work referrals. Defendant now moves to dismiss, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment on each of plaintiffs claims.
I. Background1
Plaintiff Brendan J. Lydon (“plaintiff’ or “Lydon”) has been a member o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
Darryl Leslie died of a heart-related event while a prisoner at the Suffolk County House of Correction. Plaintiff, the administratrix of the estate of Leslie, filed this action against several corrections officers who were involved in the transport of Leslie around the time of his death. Plaintiff brings a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Defendants used exc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner, Timothy J. Duval, brings this motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a) claiming that his criminal sentence as an armed career criminal was excessive and in violation of due process. Specifically, he claims that after an intervening change in law from the Supreme Court and the First Circuit, one of the predicate offenses used to apply an enhanced ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendant Anheuser-Busch’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim and plaintiffs claims. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS defendant’s motion for summary judgment on all of plaintiffs claims and on defendant’s counterclaim. The Court DENIES defendant’s request for attorneys’ fees.
I. BACKGROUND
This trademark infringement and unfair compe...
Views: 0
Page 99803
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss of the Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and GRANTS the motion to dismiss of Dr. Steve Nelson.
I. BACKGROUND
This dispute stems from plaintiff Anna Mathai’s dismissal from the School of Medicine of the Louisiana State University Health Sciences ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 19), and Plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 27). For the following reasons, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED and Plaintiffs Motion is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
The facts relevant to the disposition of the instant Motions, which are essentially not in dispute, are set forth below.
Plaintiff Thomas Hardy...
Views: 0
Page 99948
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ARTHUR PERRY BRUDER,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1492 (JDB)
DR. STEPHEN CHU, Secretary,
U.S. Department of Energy,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
BENJAMIN CUNNINGHAM, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 13-960 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The extent to which the adult porn industry utilizes young-looking performers is the central fact issue in the trial of this case. The attraction of males to younger women is not a new story. Mozart focused on this theme in several of his operas. In The Magic Flute, Papageno, the lonely bird-catcher, wonders how he is ever going to meet someon...
Views: 0
Page 100219
OPINION
John Landy and Margaret Sauchelli bring this action against Jennifer Velez, Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Human Services (“DHS”), and Valerie Harr, Director of the DHS Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services.1 DHS administers Medicaid, which is a means-tested program. At some point, Plaintiffs transferred certain assets to others as gifts, exposing themselves to ...
Views: 0
Page 100258
ORDER Petitioner Antonio S. Avent (hereinafter “petitioner”) petitioned this court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pet., D.E. 1. The matter is before the court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment. Resp’t’s Mot. for Summ. J., D.E. 9. Petitioner was given notice of the motion, but did not file any response. See Docket at D.E. 11. In this posture, the matter is rip...
Views: 0
Page 100292
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MICHAEL JOHNSON,
Civil Action No. 12-cv-868 (BJR)
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court is the motion to compel of plaintiff Kenneth M. Erase as Special Administrator for the Estate of Donald Erase (“Erase”). For the reasons explained below, we grant Erase’s motion.
BACKGROUND
We will assume that the reader is familiar with our opinion in Krase v. Life Ins. Co. of North America, No. 11 C 7659, 2012 WL 4483506 (N.D.Ill. Sept. 27, 2012), *1035wh...
Views: 1
Page 100308
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiffs in this action are Pamela Lewis, individually and as personal representative of the estate of Steven Edward Lewis, deceased, and Keith Whitehead and John Wroblewski as co-personal representatives of the estate of Philip Charles Gray, deceased. The decedents, British subjects and residents of the United Kingdom, were killed in a helicopter crash on September 22, 2009 ne...
Views: 0
*561
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Karen Mancini has filed this direct action against defendant State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (“State Farm”), the insurer of JML Construction, Inc. (“JML”) which had a contract to build a residence for plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment that State Farm is liable for a money judgment which plaintiff has obtained against the now insolvent JML.1
Before the co...
Views: 0
ORDER
After review of the record, and noting that there were no objections filed, the report and recommendation (Doc. 59) is hereby adopted, and the motion to suppress (Doc. 28) is hereby GRANTED.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
JOHN T. MAUGHMER, United States Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is the Motion to Suppress Evidence (Doc. # 28) filed on February 8, 2013, by defendant Ricardo Vare...
Views: 0
ORDER
AND NOW, this 18th day of July, 2013, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson (Doc. 20), recommending that defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) be denied, and, following an independent review of the record, it appearing that neither party has objected to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, and that there is n...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. Introduction.
This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s motion for an order directing the *234return of documents that defendant previously produced to plaintiff but now seeks to claw back. Specifically, the defendant produced a mediation memo and a consulting expert’s report in discovery and contends that the documents are privileged and were inadvertently produced. In decidin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Count One of the Plaintiffs’ Fifth Amended Complaint sets forth an allegation of an overarching conspiracy on the part of the Defendants, who are private equity firms, “to allocate the market for and artificially fix, maintain, or stabilize prices of securities in club LB Os in violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.” Plaintiffs are shareholders of the companies...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
TRUTHOUT and )
JEFFREY LIGHT, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
HAMDY ALEX ABOU-HUSSEIN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Ci...
Views: 0
*537OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
The Court previously issued an Opinion and Order [Docket Items 22 & 23] mandating that Defendant Delaware River Port Authority (“DRPA”) must participate in binding interest arbitration with Plaintiff Fraternal Order of Police Penn-Jersey Lodge 30 (“FOP”) regarding the terms and conditions of FOP members’ employment. The parties asked the Court via letter [Docket Item 2...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant Chet Morrison Contractors, L.L.C.’s (“Defendant”) Motion in Limine to Exclude Report and Testimony of Robert E. Borison.1 *963After considering the complaint, the pending motion, the memorandum in support, the opposition, the record, and the applicable law, the Court will deny the pending motion.
I. Background
A Factual Background
According to...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The above-entitled matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated July 15, 2013. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b).
I. Summary of Decision
The City of Duluth recently enacted an ordinance that requires ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Complaint and for More Definite Statement [DE 8]. The Court has carefully considered the motion, response, reply, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
Introduction
1
Plaintiff, Aceto Corporation (“Plaintiff’ or “Aceto”) is an international marketing, sales and distribution com...
Views: 0
Page 100625
*704MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the court is the motion of the defendant, Sony Pictures Classics, Inc. (“Sony”), seeking dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The plaintiff, Faulkner Literary Rights, LLC (“Faulkner”) has responded in opposition. The court has viewed Woody Allen’s movie, Midnight in Paris, read the book, Requiem for a Nun, and is thankful that the...
Views: 0
Page 100634
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING MONROE’S OBJECTIONS (Doc. # 15) TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. #13) IN ITS ENTIRETY; AFFIRMING THE COMMISSIONER’S FINAL NON-DISABILITY DETERMINATION AND TERMINATING THIS CASE
Mindy Monroe (“Monroe”) brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review of the decisio...
Views: 0
ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DOC. ## 14, 18] AND MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE PARTY PLAINTIFF [DOC. # 34]
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment [Doc. ## 14, 18] and Plaintiff Screen Actors Guild, Inc’s (“SAG”) motion to substitute party plaintiff [Doc. # 34]. For the reasons set forth below, SAG’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED and Defen...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Xerox Corporation (“Xerox” or “Plaintiff’), brings this action for damages relating to Defendants’ alleged breach of two lease agreements (the “March and April 2010 Lease Agreements”) and a purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) for printing equipment, supplies and services (collectively, the “Agreements”). (Docket No. 5.) Defendants, MHW, Inc.1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Wayne Edwards brings the above-captioned action against Defendant Huntington Union Free School District, asserting claims of racial discrimination, hostile work environment and retaliation under Title VII, § 1981, § 1983, New York State Human Rights Law and Suffolk County Human Rights Law. Defendant moved for summary judgment and attorneys’ fees. The Court heard ora...
Views: 0
OPINION On October 29, 2009, defendant Angel Martinez was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and murder in furtherance thereof, in violation of 21 U.S.C. *516§ 848(e)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. On February 17, 2010, I sentenced Martinez principally to a term of life imprisonment. Now proceeding pro se...
Views: 0
Page 100728
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TIMOTHY D. NAEGELE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 03-cv-2507 (RLW)
DEANNA J. ALBERS, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Court recently ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________
)
LON RATLEY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 13-CV-0756(KBJ)
...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION I. INTRODUCTION Now before the Court is Plaintiff IBiz, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for a preliminary injunction against Defendant City of Hayward (“Defendant” or “City”). ECF No. 19 (“Mot.”). The case is related to No. 13-1212 (the “Net Connection Case”), and the parties often incorporate documents from that c...
Views: 0
ORDER RE PARTIES’ CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment are GRANTED and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED.
I.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On April 27, 2012, Plaintiff Big 5 Sporting Goods Corporation (“Big 5”) filed a Complaint ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is “Defendants Carter Express Incorporated and David Big-ley’s Motion to Compel Production,” (Dkt. No. 17), filed June 11, 2013. The underlying action stems from “a cycling accident that occurred in Webb County, Texas ... in the pre-dawn hours,” where Defendant Higley’s “bobtail tractor” impacted the rear of Plaintiff Augusto Ramos, Jr.’s bicycle. (...
Views: 0
DEFENDANT NAUGHTY DOG, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (filed 06/10/13; Dkt. No. 105)
Court hears oral argument. The Tentative circulated and attached hereto, is adopted as the Court’s final ruling. Defendants’ motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant Naughty Dog, Inc.’s response to the amended complaint will be due 21 days from the date of this order.
...
Views: 0
This action was commenced in New York State Supreme Court, Niagara County, on April 10, 2012, by three families who own homes and reside in the vicinity of the Love Canal Landfill (the “Landfill”) in the City of Niagara Falls, New York, seeking damages and equitable relief based on personal injuries and property damage caused by alleged releases of toxic chemicals and hazardous waste deposited at ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Defendant Portillo’s Hot Dogs, Inc.’s (hereinafter, “Portillo’s” or “Defendant”) Motion for Summary-Judgment and Motion to Strike. For the reasons stated herein, the Court denies Defendant’s Motion to Strike and grants the Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
Portillo’s operates thirty-two (32) fast-food restaurants in the Chicagoland area...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING BOND
Before the Court is the Government’s Motion for Stay of Bond Order and Appeal *879of Magistrate Judge’s Order Granting Bond in this Matter, filed June 28, 2013. (ECF No. 20.) For the following reasons, after careful consideration of the record, the relevant law, and the briefs of the parties, the Court REVOKES the Order Granting Bond and ORDERS that Defendant Cameron Marcrum be...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ARTHUR GILBERT, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 05-cv-2128 (RJL)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SAMUEL A. OLATUNJI, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CARMEN JEAN-BAPTISTE, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAKELAND REGIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 12-600 (RJL)
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This case is a facial challenge to the constitutionality of Georgia’s Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011. Now, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. United States, a remand from the Eleventh Circuit, and a permanent injunction against section 7 of the act, the remaining Defendants move to dismiss the claim regarding section 8. The Plaintiffs s...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 72) filed by the Government. The Government’s motion has gone unopposed and the time for opposition has long since passed. Upon consideration of all relevant filings, case law, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court GRANTS the Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment, as described herein.
I....
Views: 1
Page 101214
ORDER
Before the court is plaintiff Laura Leigh’s (“Leigh”) amended motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. # 16 1) on remand from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Doc. # 59).
*10921. Facts and Procedural Background
A. Parties
Plaintiff Laura Leigh (“Leigh”) is a photojournalist and author for Horseback Magazine who covers stories concerning wild horses and their management by private agen...
Views: 0
Page 101289
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Sandoz Inc. (collectively, “Momenta”) bring suit against Teva Pharma*297ceuticals USA, Inc. (“Teva”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,575,886 (“the '886 patent”).1
I. Background
In July, 2010, after receiving FDA approval, plaintiffs began to market the first generic version of Lovenox (otherwise known as enoxaparin) in the Unit...
Views: 1
Page 101292
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiffs Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Momenta”) and Sandoz Inc. (“San-doz”) (collectively, and for simplicity, “Momenta”) bring suit against Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Amphastar”), International Medication Systems, Ltd., Actavis, and Watson Pharma, Inc. (collectively, and for simplicity, “Amphastar”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,575,886 (“the '886 patent”) ...
Views: 0
Page 101304
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MÍOTION FOR MANDATORY PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiffs Jon F. and Maryann F. bring this action as parents and next friends of Taylor F. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) against Arapahoe County School District 5 (“District”) pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) seeking a mandatory preliminary injunction ordering the District to pay for Taylor’...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff suffered a fall at his home on September 21, 2007 and broke his left wrist. He was operated on four days later. Because of complications, a fracture malformation, another operation was performed and a metal plate surgically inserted weeks later. Plaintiff, who is right handed, filed for social security disability benefits on October 3, 2008, which initial application...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Mark Edwards (“Petitioner”) brings this pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, *358pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, attacking his 2005 state convictions resulting from a series of armed robberies that took place in Nassau County, New York. As part of his petition, Petitioner has moved for leave to conduct discovery and for a “stay and abeyance” in order to exhaust a claim in...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This diversity case arose in the wake of the well-publicized Deepwater Horizon oil spill. When the oil began to spill, Pack-gen, a Maine producer of packaging products, saw an opportunity to manufacture and sell oil containment boom. Packgen worked to negotiate a sale to BP for several months, altering its boom design based on BP’s input, and subjecting its bo...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND SECOND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the court are two motions: (1) Plaintiffs Chara Curtis, Cynthia Aldrich, *1254and Alfred Currier’s second motion for partial summary judgment (2d SJ Mot. (Dkt. # 32)); and (2) Plaintiffs’ second motion for sanctions (2d Sane. Mot. (Dkt. # 30)). The court has considered both motio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Presently before the Court is defendants’ motion requesting that the Court “reconsider and vacate the portion of the Court’s [January 16, 2007] order granting plaintiffs summary judgment on liability, and to instead dismiss these consolidated actions, based on the intervening change in controlling law brought about by the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Fl...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER1
Before the Court are defendants Repsol Petróleo, S.A. (“RPSA”) and Repsol YPF Trading y Transporte, S.A.’s (“RYTTSA”) motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Docket No. 99; Docket No. 100.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS the motions as to RPSA and RYTTSA.2
I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Hi...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. NO. 159]
Pending before the Court is the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of the plaintiffs, Dey, L.P. and Dey Inc. (collectively “Dey”). (Dkt. No. 159). Dey seeks summary judgment as to whether the proposed production and marketing of a generic version of Perforomist® by the defendants, Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., Tev...
Views: 0
Page 101525
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DAVID H. LEMPERT,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 12-01518 (CKK)
SUSAN RICE, U.S. Ambassador to the United
Nations, UNITED NATIONS, UNITED
NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME,
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the court is Defendant Yuri Bershchansky’s (“defendant,” or “Mr. Bershchansky”) motion to suppress (i) evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant executed on January 31, 2011, and (ii) statements made by the defendant on January 31, 2011, during the execution of the search warrant. Mr. Bershchansky is charged with possession of child pornography, in violati...
Views: 0
Page 101752
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, limited partners in one or more investment funds (collectively, the “Funds”) managed by The Nutmeg Group, LLC (“Nutmeg”), filed suit on their own behalf and derivatively on behalf of the Funds against Leslie J. Weiss, the court-appointed receiver for Nutmeg and the funds; Barnes & Thornburg, LLP (“Barnes & Thornburg”), the law firm retained by the receiver to perfo...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff Stephanie Fini’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 41), to which Defendant, Dish Network L.L.C. (“Defendant”), responded (Doc. No. 55), and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 46), to which Plaintiff responded (Doc. No. 53). Plaintiff also filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority (Doc. No. 69), to which t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Carlett D. Ward (“plaintiff”), proceeding pro se,1 filed suit alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5. (D.I. 2) Presently before the court is a motion to compel and motion for summary judgment filed by defendant MBNA America (“defendant”) and plaintiffs response. (D.I. 43, 48, 49...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This Hatch-Waxman action arises out of the filing of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) by defendants Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Mylan Inc. (collectively, “Mylan”) seeking to market generic fentanyl buccal tablets. Plaintiff Cephalon Inc. is the holder of approved New Drug Application (“NDA”) No. 21-947 for Fentora® brand fentanyl buccal tablets, used to trea...
Views: 0
Page 101851
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-452 (CKK)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
ORDER This case requires the court to address what might be best characterized as a metaphysical question: did a spoken threat attributed to the defendant and indisputably vocalized in another district, occur in this district for purposes of establishing venue for the defendant’s criminal trial? 1. Background The defendant in this case, Ramon Alvarado (“Alvarado”), has an established history of be...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On April 3, 2009, Plaintiff Jewish Community Center of Staten Island (“the JCC”) commenced this action in Supreme Court, Richmond County, against defendant Trumbull Insurance Company *221(“Trumbull”). On May 13, 2009, Trumbull removed the action to this Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441 and 1446, citing diversity of citizenship. (Notice of Removal (Dkt. No. 1)). Substantively, ...
Views: 1
Page 102064
OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Nicholas Florio brings this § 1983 action alleging violations of his federal constitutional rights by defendants Deputy Warden Canty and Correction Officer Leach arising out of alleged conditions of his confinement at the Anna M. Kross Center (“AMKC”) on Rikers Island. (Dkt. No. 2: Compl.) Presently before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff brings this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and corresponding provisions of state and local law, asserting that she was denied a promotion, training opportunities, and received disparate pay based on the fact that she is African-American. She has also asserted a claim for retaliation based on her unsuccessful com...
Views: 0
Page 102070
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant Richard “Rickey” Berry, in his official capacity, and the Mississippi Department of Human Services, to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim, pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff Elizabeth Williams has responded t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before the Court is defendant Maoz Vegetarian USA, Inc.’s (“Maoz’s”) motion for leave to amend its answer. Defendant requests permission to add a fifth affirmative defense based on the one-year statute of limitations provision found in the parties’ franchise agreement. (Def.’s Mot. for Leave to File a First Amended Answer (“Def.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 65 at 2.)...
Views: 0
Page 102185
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 04-1543 (RWR)
)
SCIENCE ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Western Wood Preservers Institute, Treated Wood Council, Southern Pressure Treaters’ Association, Creosote Council, and Railway Tie Association (“plaintiffs”) sued John M. McHugh in his official capacity as the Secretary of the Army, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and Rebecca Blank in her official capacity as Acting Secretary of Commerce (“defendants” o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On October 26, 1993, petitioner Manuel Alejandro Calderon (“Calderon” or “Petitioner”), a permanent legal resident of the United States and native of Columbia, pled guilty before this court to conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 & § 841(b)(1)(c). After providing cooperation that resulted in the conviction of his co-defendant, he was ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND TO STAY ACTION AND GRANTING MOTIONS TO SEAL
Re: ECF No. 17, 18, 42
In this putative class action for violations of the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act and related claims, Defendants move to compel arbitration and to stay the action pending arbitration. Plaintiff Up*1176town Drug Company, Inc. (“Uptown”) opposes the m...
Views: 0
Page 102278
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Petitioner National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh (“National Union”) contracted with respondent Personnel Plus, Inc., a California corporation that provides temporary help services, to provide workers’ compensation liability insurance (the “Insurance Program”) for Personnel Plus and its affiliate, co-respondent Great Dane Management Services, Inc., from September 1, 20...
Views: 0
ORDER
In May 2012, the Washington Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) proposed, and the Fish & Wildlife Service approved, an amendment to a habitat conservation plan governing the logging of forests in southwest Washington. Plaintiffs brought suit alleging that Fish & Wildlife failed to take certain statutory steps under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. (“ESA”), before app...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DARRELL CAIN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-854 (JEB)
HARRIS TEETER, INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Darrell Cain blames his injured back on a June...
Views: 0
Page 102414
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-452 (CKK)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Ese O’Diah (“O’Diah”) brings this employment discrimination suit against his former employer, Yogo Oasis, which operates a café under the name Roastown Coffee (“Roastown”), and Roastown’s owner, Doug G. Shin (“Shin”). In his complaint, O’Diah alleges that he was wrongfully terminated on the basis of his race, color, and national origin. He seeks rel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This civil action is before the Court on defendant Tennessee Valley Authority’s (“TVA”) Motion for Summary Judgment on Count II (the NEPA Count) of the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. 129]. Plaintiffs filed a response [Doc. 139], and defendant replied [Doc. 147]. After careful consideration of the parties’ arguments, the record in this case, and the relevant law, the Court fin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Entrepreneur Media, Inc. (“EMI”) filed this action against corporate Defendants JMD Entertainment Group, LLC and JMD Entertainment and Media Group (the “corporate Defendants”) and individual Defendant Janice McLean-Deloatch (“Ms. McLean-Deloatch”). Plaintiffs Complaint (ECF No. 1) alleges federal trademark infringement and federal false designation of origin/unfair ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Dresser-Rand Company (“Dresser-Rand”) brings a variety of claims against G. Curtis Jones, Jeffrey King, Albert E. Wadsworth, IV, and Global Power Specialist, Inc. (“Global Power”), including a claim for violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (“the CFAA”).1 I exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Defendants filed a ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendant Taylor Energy Company LLC’s (“Taylor”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) and Taylor’s alternative motion to stay. Having already addressed Taylor’s motion to dismiss this case for lack of standing pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1),1 the Court now addresses Taylor’s motion to dismiss this case for failure to...
Views: 0
Page 102599
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KHARII W. BRODIE,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 11-1769 (BJR)
v.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
BRENT JACKSON,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
ENTRY ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
Plaintiff, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), as Receiver for Irwin Union Bank and Trust Company (“Irwin”), moves to remand this case back to the Bartholomew Circuit Court. Being duly advised, the court GRANTS the FDIC’s motion for the reasons set forth below.
I. Background
On September 29, 2006, Irwin purchased a residential mortgage-backed ...
Views: 0
Page 102616
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MANUFACTURERS, CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA, and
BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE, Civil Action No. 13-cv-635 (RLW)
Plaintiffs,
v.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Defendant,
AMNESTY...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Before the Court is “Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction” filed on June 25, 2013, seeking an order enjoining the enforcement of North Dakota House Bill 1456. See Docket No. 3. The Plaintiffs further request the bond requirement be waived in this matter. See Docket Nos. 3 and 6. Defendant Birch Burdick filed a response on July 1...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 7, 2013, Magistrate Judge Papak issued his careful and well-reasoned Findings and Recommendation (“F & R”) [358] in the above-captioned case. He recommended that (1) Travelers’1 motion for partial summary judgment against Glacier for breach of the cooperation clause [238] and Continental’s joinder in that motion [281] be granted; (2) Glacier’s motion for summary judgment ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter arises from a state court action in which plaintiffs allege that defendants’ negligence caused the death of plaintiffs’ decedent. Before the court for decision is the United States’ motion to quash subpoenas. (Doc. 6). The United States seeks to quash subpoenas issued by plaintiffs and served upon Peter Federovich, Nancy Wills, and Marcia Steele, seeking testimony and document...
Views: 0
ORDER This is a methamphetamine case tried non-jury where the sole issue is the drug weight for which the defendant will be held accountable. Specifically, has the government proven that the defendant manufactured or attempted to manufacture 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a “detectable amount” of methamphetamine? The quantity of methamphetamine found within a mixture or su...
Views: 0
Page 102807
ORDER APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
By Order dated March 27, 2013, the Court preliminarily approved the parties’ proposed settlement in the above-captioned case and established procedures for notifying potential settlement class members of the settlement, as well as for allowing class members to object to the settlement’s terms. Pending now before the Court is the lead plaintiffs subsequent...
Views: 0
Page 102867
*870ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY
I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
II. TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT SUMMARY
III. THEORIES OF THE CASE
IV. BACKGROUND
A. Low’s Grocery Robberies, August 7 and 29,1981
B. Lillie & Eddie’s Grocery Robbery, August 18,1981
1. Testimony of Eddie Wright
2. Testimony of Darrell Perry
3. Testimony of Gino White1
4. Testimony of Mic...
Views: 1
Page 102882
ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs request for expenses related to briefing and arguing his counter-motion to compel that the Court granted on January 24, 2013. Docket No. 49; see also Docket No. 48 (order granting counter-motion to compel).1 Defendants objected to the calculation of expenses sought. See Docket No. 50. The Court finds the mat...
Views: 0
Before the court is the defendant WalMart’s (“defendant”) motion for attorney’s fees and nontaxable costs (# 74). Plaintiff Shalimar Beach (“plaintiff’) has opposed (# 75), and defendant has replied (# 79). Pursuant to order of the court, the parties have filed supplemental briefs addressing the impact of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Goldberg v. Pacific Indemnity Company, 627 F.3d 752 (9th Cir....
Views: 0
Page 102970
MEMORANDUM
On January 10, 2013, plaintiffs (the “Funds”), several union benefit funds established and maintained pursuant to collective-bargaining agreements (“CBAs”), filed suit alleging that defendant River Avenue Contracting Corp. (“River”) and the individual defendants, Richard and Sonia Tonyes, Richard Tonyes, Jr., and Robert Dugan, fraudulently established alter ego entities, namely, defe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs William A. Cohn and the Cohn Law firm1 filed this action against Defendant Commissioner of Social Security. Plaintiffs contend that Defendant Commissioner (1) did not disburse attorney fees as ordered by agency administrative law judges (“ALJs”); (2) improperly withheld attorney f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the motion (Doc No. 10) of defendants Red Bull Distribution Company (“RBDC”)1 and Jeff Barta (“Barta”) to dismiss the action or, alternatively, to stay the proceedings, and to compel arbitration. Plaintiff Jeffrey J. Wallace (“Wallace” or “plaintiff’) has filed an opposition (Doc. No. 11), and defendants have submitted a brief in r...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Parties’ cross motions for summary judgment, docket nos. 14 and 18. The Court has reviewed the motions, opposition, and replies, and all pleadings related thereto, and now enters the following Order.
I. Background
Plaintiff David Baxter was diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer in September 2011. Complaint at ¶ 3; Administrative Record (“AR”) a...
Views: 0
Page 103153
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Introduction
Cindy Biller (“Plaintiff’) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking review of the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant” or “Commissioner”)1 denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-433 (“Act”). This matter comes before the *7...
Views: 0
Page 103234
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
LOUIS VINCE )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS adopting Report and Recommendations re [29] Report and Recommendations. Action on motion: denying [9] Motion to Dismiss. “Report and Recommendation accepted and adopted.”
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT (#9)
COLLINGS, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Oliver O’Brien (“O’Brien”) brings t...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR CLARIFICATION AND RULING ON OTHER DISCOVERY DISPUTES RELATING TO CLAIMS OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE OR WORK-PRODUCT PROTECTION
1
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration or, in *556the Alternative, for Clarification of Order Overruling Plaintiffs’ Objections to Order Granting Motion to Compel; Plai...
Views: 1
Page 103359
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SKY ANGEL U.S., LLC, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 12-1834 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LARRY GRANT CONSTRUCTION; and
MA-CHIS LOWER CREEK INDIAN
TRIBE ENTERPRISES, INC.
Civil Action No. 12-00837 (BJR)
Plaintiffs,
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTI...
Views: 0
Page 103361
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
NIAGARA PRESERVATION, )
COALITION, INC. )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 13-1015 (EGS)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1032
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS.....................................................1032
A. Summary Judgment Standards......................................1032
B. Bars To Preemption................................................1033
1. Is...
Views: 0
Page 103381
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
EMBASSY OF THE FEDERAL
REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA,
Civil Action No. 10-cv-1929 (BJR)
Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM OPINION ENTERING
v.
...
Views: 0
Page 103484
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Diane Mammola and Michela Mammola (“plaintiffs”), the daughter and step-daughter of Seta Mammola (“Debtor”), bring suit against Kathleen P. Dwyer (“Dwyer”), the duly appointed Trustee of Debtor’s estate, and Dwyer’s law firm MacLean Holloway Doherty Ardiff & Morse, P.C. (“MHD”) (collectively, “defendants”), for alleged misconduct during Debtor’s bankruptcy proceedings.
I. Backg...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This cause comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion to Amend the Amended Complaint to Add an Additional Party Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (DE 37). The motion is briefed and ripe for review. The Court has reviewed the briefs and the record, and is otherwise advised in the premises.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of a slip and fall in an au...
Views: 0
*797 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 12(b)(6) Justice Sutherland taught us that a “nuisance may be merely a right thing in the wrong place, — like a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard.” Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 388, 47 S.Ct. 114, 118, 71 L.Ed. 303 (1926). Vulgar language, like vulg...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In August 2012, a Grand Jury in the Southern District of New York returned a three-count Indictment against the defendants, Rana Khandakar and Usawan Saelim. Count One of the Indictment charged the defendants with conspiracy to commit access device fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(b)(2). (Indictment ¶¶ 1-4.) Count Two charged the defendants with conspiracy to commit mail...
Views: 0
Page 103683
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Morgan Stanley brings this action for compensatory and punitive damages, disgorgement, reimbursement, contribution, and attorneys’ fees and costs against Joseph “Chip” Skowron III, a former Managing Director of Morgan Stanley.1 Skowron moves to dismiss Count Three (fraud), Five (contribution), and a portion of Count Two (breach of fiduciary duty) of the Complai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Rosebud Entertainment, LLC (“Rosebud”) sued Professional Laminating LLC (“Professional Laminating”),1 William Oertel, and Barbara Oertel (collectively, the “Defendants”) for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and other claims. For the following reasons, Rosebud’s motion for partial summary judgment will be denied.
I. Background2
A. The Parties
Rosebud3 publishes, m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDÉR
Defendants Truehope Inc. (“Truehope”), Open Mind Consulting (“Open Mind”), Dana Ray and Autumn Stringam (togeth*431er, “the Stringams”), and Quintessential Bioseiences, LLC (“Q Sciences”) move to stay this action in deference to an earlier-filed action in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, Canada. For the reasons that follow, the defendants’ motion is granted. Backgroun...
Views: 0
*446DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants Christmas Tree Shops and Bed Bath & Beyond1 (collectively, the “Defendants”), (Doc. 40), seeking dismissal of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (“AC”), (Doc. 19). For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
I. Background
The following facts are set forth based on Defendants’ L...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs assert claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p, and New York General Business Law (“GBL”) § 349. Defendants move to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Because defendants urge numerous grounds for dismissal, it is necessary to structure the Court’s analys...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DOC. 32]
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ second motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. (Defs.’ MSJ [Doc. 32]; see Reply [Doc. 34].) The Court decides the matters on the papers and without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7.1(d.1). For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion.
I. Backg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Following the jury’s verdict finding him guilty of securities fraud1 and perjury,2 defendant Timothy McGee moved for judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, a new trial. We denied his motion and now explain why.
The trial evidence, viewed in favor of the government, was that McGee obtained information from an insider that Philadelphia Consolidated Holding Company (“PHLY...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Kaylea Guddeck, a minor, as well as her mother and guardian Julie Guddeck have sued defendant SmithKline Beecham Corp.1 (“GSK”) for personal injuries allegedly suffered as a result of Julie Guddeck’s ingestion of defendant’s antidepressant drug Paxil during her pregnancy. Plaintiffs assert that the drug caused Kay-lea Guddeck to have a critical neural tube defect necessita...
Views: 1
ORDER
In this copyright infringement action, Plaintiff Franklin White claims that the movie Lottery Ticket, which Defendants allegedly were involved in making, infringes his book First Round Lottery Pick. The case comes before the Court on White’s motion for a preliminary injunction [20],
A “preliminary injunction is a drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly establishes the ‘...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On May 24, 2012, U.S. Magistrate Judge Silvia Carreño-Coll returned Defendant Dennys Marrero Romero’s indictment (Docket Nos. 3 and 4). Defendant was subsequently arrested in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on September 17, 2012. On the same date, he was taken before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, which ordered Marrero’s transfer to the Distri...
Views: 0
Page 103977
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
CHEROKEE COUNTY, KANSAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
SALLY JEWEL, in her official capacity Civil Action 08-317 (RC)
as SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, et
al.,
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
LIDIA EMELINDA PEREZ CRABBE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
Page 103984
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LEWIS WATERS, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SARAH MAZZARINO as co-executor of the
:
ESTATE OF JEANNIE R. TOOLE, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 13-322 (RC)
...
Views: 0
Page 104005
*1290
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has for its consideration the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the defendants, Jose Olivares and the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. (Doc. 29). Plaintiff, Inayat M. Dar, filed a Response (Doc. 35), and defendants filed a Reply (Doc. 40) as well as a Notice of Supplemental Legal Authority (Doc. 41). The Court has reviewed these submissions, t...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is Defendant Bull Moose Tube Company’s (“Bull Moose”) motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (Court File No. 22). Plaintiff George Rat-ledge (“Plaintiff’) responded to Bull Moose’s motion (Court File No. 34), and Bull Moose replied to Plaintiffs response (Court File No. 38). Bull Moose argues the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over it because, although it main...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is Defendant Buffalo & Associates, PLC’s (“Defendant”) partial motion for judgment on the pleadings (Court File No. 31). Defendant seeks dismissal of some of Plaintiff Larry Derry’s (“Plaintiff’) claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant’s motion. For the following reasons, the Cour...
Views: 0
Page 104037
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
BEFORE THE COURT is Petitioner Maria Julia Gallardo’s First Amended Verified Petition for Return of Child under the Hague Convention. (Doc. 15). This case was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for the Midland/Odessa Division on March 21, 2013, by Order of Referral from the United States District Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Appendix C ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Kevin O’Gorman filed this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Chicago, seeking compensatory and punitive damages for alleged violations of his right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. After his first complaint was dismissed, O’Gorman filed an amended complaint, adding additional facts and an equal protection claim. The City has moved ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Lydia E. Vega (“Vega”), brings seven counts against the defendant, Chicago Park District (“Park”), alleging unlawful employment discrimination. Count I claims discrimination on the basis of national origin in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“§ 1981”). Counts II and V claim retaliatory action in violation of § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the court in the above-captioned matter are two motions for summary judgment on the grounds of non-infringement (Docs. 232, 235), filed by defendants Cirqit.com, Inc., and InnerWorkings, Inc., respectively. Also before the court is the motion for leave to file an amended answer (Doc. 252), filed jointly by defendants, and plaintiff e-LYNXX Corporation’s motion to str...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
SUSAN CARRILLO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND
ETHICS IN WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1021 (JEB)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pla...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KIMBERLY WARNER,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 10-1306 (BAH)
Judge Beryl A. Howell
DAVITA VANCE-COOKS, in her official
capacity as ...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on the motion to dismiss filed by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, the United States Postal Services, and the Thrift Savings Plan. Doc. No. 12. The stay entered by the Court on March 4, 2013 (Doc. No. 20) is LIFTED. For the reasons that follow, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is well-taken and is GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ motion for an extension of t...
Views: 0
Page 104209
FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Report Of Magistrate Judge (DE 23) filed herein by United States Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White and upon Defendant Calixto Calderon’s Motion To Dismiss (DE 12), which has been construed by the Court to be a Motion For Summary Judgment. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the entire record herein and is otherwise fully a...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is Defendant’s Motion for Application of Texas’ Law of Comparative Fault (Doc. #22). For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
I. Background
The facts giving rise to plaintiffs claim, as detailed by the parties in their motions, are as follows. On October 15, 2010, Nancy L. Nixon (“Nixon”) was travelling west on U.S. Highway 54, a two-lane highway, in Hartley C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant GE Healthcare’s motion for a new trial, to *811alter or amend the judgment, and for remittitur (Doc. #: 271). For the reasons to follow, the motion is DENIED.
I. Background
On September 2, 2005, Plaintiff Paul Decker was injected with a gadolinium-based contrast dye developed and sold by GE Healthcare, Inc. (“GEHC”). Such dye...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Julio Perez, proceeding pro se, brings this action against Defendant Pro-genies Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Progenies”), alleging that Defendant violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”), 18 U.S.C. § 1514A, by terminating Plaintiffs employment in retaliation for a memorandum he wrote regarding a press release about a pharmaceutical drug. Defendant now mo...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Plaintiff, a Special Agent employed by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), commenced this action for employment discrimination on July 19, 2011, alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”),1 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. and the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff alleges that defendant, her former employer, violated Massachusetts and federal law by tolerating purported sexual harassment by her supervisor and by later terminating her employment in retaliation for her complaints about the same. Defendant moves for summary judgment on all claims.
By prior order, the Court ruled that defendant’s motion for summary judgment would b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This is an action for the alleged infringement of patents pertaining to language-learning products, software, online services and practice tools. Currently pending before the Court are 1) the parties’ proposed, competing constructions of disputed claim terms within the patents-in-suit, 2) plaintiffs motion to amend the Complaint and 3) plaintiffs motion for a stay pending resol...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Basis of Judicial Estoppel, which was filed on May 9, 2013. (See ECF No. 12.) Plaintiff responded in opposition on June 24, 2013. (See ECF No. 22.) Defendant filed a Reply on July 8, 2013. (See ECF No. 25.)
For the reasons stated below, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In the Memorandum Opinion and Order of September 28, 2011 this Court denied the Board of County Commissioners of St. Mary’s County’s (hereinafter “the County”) motion for partial summary judgment and granted in part and denied in part Marcas, L.L.C.’s (hereinafter “Marcas”) motion for partial summary judgment. ECF Nos. 107-108. On February 2, 2012 Marcas moved for leave to fi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Magistrate No. 13-0264
DAR
KRZYSZTOF WASIK,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
EIDOS DISPLAY, LLC, )
EIDOS III, LLC, GARY RUBLOFF, )
)
Petitioners, )
) Misc. Action No. 12-625 (EGS)
v. )
...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant DB Structured Products, Inc. (“DBSP”) moves pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (“FAG”) filed by Plaintiff HSBC Bank USA (“HSBC” or “Plaintiff’). For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.
I. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS
Plaintiff HSBC initiated this action on November 27, 2012, at the direction of Mo...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER FOR SANCTIONS Before the Magistrate Judge upon referral from the District Judge is Defendant Vincent McKinney’s (“McKinney”) Motion for Sanctions (Document No. 34) against Plaintiff, Allstate Texas Lloyd’s (“Allstate”), in which Defendant seeks, as sanctions, an Order granting a default judgment against Plaintiff, or alternatively an Order striking Plaintiffs experts. Having co...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT FOODLAND SUPER MARKET, LIMITED dba SACK N’ SAVE FOODS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 25)
Plaintiff Liza A. Jackson, an African-American woman, claims her employer, Defendant Foodland Super Market, dba Sack N’ Save Foods, discriminated against her on the basis of race. Plaintiff seeks relief under Hawaii state laws prohibiting race-based discrimination by employers....
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on two motions to dismiss: (1) Defendant City and County of Denver’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (# 137), and (2) Defendant City of Aurora’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Bel*1265cher’s and Plaintiff Piltz’s Claims for Lack of Subject Mat...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT GRADO’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS CELL SITE AND SIMULATED CELL SITE EVIDENCE
[Doc. No. 1002]
Presently before the Court is the motion of Defendant Miguel Grado (“Defendant” or “Defendant Grado”) to suppress cell site and simulated cell site evidence. [Doc. No. 1002, Def.’s Mot.] For the following reasons, the Court DENIES the motion.
BACKGROUND
This case involves charges of con...
Views: 0
Page 104559
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
In this action involving alleged fraud in the sale of “viatical life settlement contracts,” a number of defendants move for summary judgment. As set forth below, because the undisputed facts establish that plaintiffs were on notice of the alleged fraud over three years before the filing of this action, defendants’ motion for summ...
Views: 0
Page 104605
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Greenlight Reinsurance, Ltd. (“Greenlight”) and Verdant Holdings Company, Ltd. (“Verdant”), bring this action for breach of contract and declaratory judgment against Defendants Appalachian Underwriters, Inc. (“AUI”) and Insurance Services Group, Inc. (“ISG”). Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure...
Views: 0
OPINION
On June 5, 2009, a jury convicted defendant Nathaniel L. Ortiz of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 842 and 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of the drug conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(l)(B)(ii) and (c)(2). On October 28, 2009,1 sentenced Ortiz principally to a t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(docket no. 12)
In this putative class action, plaintiffs Shaneka Williams, Ahmonique Brown, and Sandra Mitchell (“Plaintiffs”) brought suit against defendants Mucci Pac U.S.A., Ltd., Mucci Pac Ltd., and Mucci Farms Ltd. for violation of the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the ‘WARN Act”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2109. Mucci Pac ...
Views: 0
Page 104676
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On September 20, 2011, plaintiff Carmella Pierce (“plaintiff”) filed the present action against Patrick Donahoe (“defendant”), Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service (“the USPS”), alleging that her employment was terminated based on age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act *370(“ADEA”)1 and disability discrimination under...
Views: 0
Page 104686
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRENDA J. LEE,
Civil Action No. 05-1335 (BJR)
Plaintiff,
v. MEMORANDUM OPINION
RAYMOND EDWIN MABUS,
Secretary of the Navy,
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
NICOLE MALLOY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 13-187 (R...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
THE BOARD OF COUNTY )
COMMISSIONERS OF KAY )
COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
...
Views: 0
Page 104689
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-319 (JDB)
JUDITH N. MACALUSO, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Petitioner,
v.
Misc. No. 13-mc-81 (ABJ-AK)
THE INSTITUTE FOR COLLEGE
ACCESS & SUCCESS,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Un...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the court is defendant Analytical Biosurgical Solutions’ (“ABISS”) Motion to Dismiss [Docket 9]. The plaintiffs filed a response, ABISS filed a reply, and the motion is ripe for review. Further pending before the court is the plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Surreply in Opposition to Defendant Analytic Biosurgical Solutions’ Motion to Dismiss [Docke...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SET ASIDE NSL LETTER
Pursuant to the National Security Letter Statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2709, the FBI issued a National Security Letter (“NSL”) to Petitioner, an electronic communication service provider (“ECSP”), seeking “subscriber information.” By certifying, under section 2709(c)(1), that disclosure of the existence of the NSL may result in “a danger to the national securi...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case is about a claim that the Illinois Department of Corrections interfered with an employee’s rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The Department of Corrections has an attendance policy of progressive discipline, wherein an employee is given increasingly strong penalties for being absent from work without approval or authorization. The policy also included a reset switch ...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendants have filed a motion seeking for this court to reconsider its order remanding this case. In that motion, defendants appear to concede that, under Smallwood v. Ill. Cent. R.R., 385 F.3d 568, 573 (5th Cir.2004), a 12(b)(6)-type standard applies to the fraudulent joinder issues in this case. This is a departure from their initial briefing, in which they asserted that a summary judgm...
Views: 0
Page 104792
ORDER
On this day the Court considered Defendant Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company National Association’s (“BONY”) motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11). For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion.
I.
A. Factual Background1
On or about April 4, 2003, Lee and Patricia Huntley executed a promissory note (the “Note”) to procure a loan for the purchase of 1802 Three Forks, San Antonio, Texa...
Views: 1
Page 104796
MEMORANDUM & OPINION
This matter is before the Court after the issuance of a mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir.2012) (Mandate issued July 9, 2013) (Doc. 72). In response to the filing of the mandate (which had been stayed by the Court of Appeals for 210 days) the parties have filed several motions which are now fully...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME )
BUILDERS et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
All claims brought by plaintiff, Doris W. May (“Ms. May”), against defendants, AT & T Integrated Disability, AT & T Corporation, and Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (“Sedgwick”), except her claim against Sedgwick under 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. (“ERISA”), have previously been dismissed. This leaves for consideration only Ms. May’s ERISA claim against Sedgwick for al...
Views: 0
ORDER ADDRESSING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
Plaintiff Christopher Ivins (“Ivins”) states two claims against Corrections Corporation of America (“CCA”): (1) wrongful discharge from employment; and (2) defamation/blacklisting. ECF 1-1 (Complaint) at 3-4.1 Now *519pending is Ivins’ Motion to Compel Discovery (ECF 25, 26), which CCA opposes (ECF 27).
I. BACKGROUND
Ivins alleges that he was hired by...
Views: 0
*123MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Anthony M. Claudio (“plaintiff’ or “Claudio”) filed the instant action against defendant Mattituck-Cutchogue Union Free School District (“defendant” or “District”), alleging gender and age discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Empl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This litigation has a long and complicated history. On March 3, 2000, in a prior related lawsuit, the Court entered judgment in the amount of $497,736, plus interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs, against Community Action Agencies Insurance Group (“CAAIG” or the “Plan”), a welfare benefits plan for employees of not-for-profit antipoverty agencies, and its trustees. ...
Views: 0
Page 105085
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending and ready for review in this breach of contract case is the motion to dismiss for improper venue filed by Defendant 5 Star Life Insurance Company (“5 Star”). (ECF No. 10). The issues have been fully briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing being deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6. For the following reasons, the motion to dismiss will be denied.
I. Backgrou...
Views: 0
Page 105132
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
(Docket No. 355)
Plaintiff Quiller Barnes initiated this action on behalf of himself and a class, asserting that Defendant AT & T Pension Benefit Plan — Nonbargained Program owed them additional benefits. Mr. Barnes asserted five claims for relief. On May 10, 2012, the Court addressed the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment on three of...
Views: 1
Page 105227
ORDER Plaintiffs, Jonathan Leis and Sartash, Inc. (collectively, “Leis”) have brought this action against former business partners, Defendants William Davidson and Michael Leonetti (collectively, “Davidson”). Leis’s five-count Amended Complaint seeks damages, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, permanent equitable relief, and a preliminary injunction. Now before the court is Davidson’s motion ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff alleges that defendants, his employer and former supervisors, unlawfully discriminated against him on the basis of his age when they terminated him. He also claims breach of contract and two state law torts arising out of the same discriminatory actions. Defendants now move for partial dismissal.
I. Background
A. Parties
Plaintiff James Galletly, III (“plaintiff’) was...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Valerie Rubinstein (“Rubinstein”), brings this putative class action alleging that Defendant, Department Stores National Bank (“DSNB”), violated the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1601, et seq., by sending periodic statements containing incomplete billing rights notices. Defendant moved to dismiss or, in the alternative, to strike Plaintiffs request for...
Views: 0
Page 105320
Memorandum Opinion and Order and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
On April 23, 2013, the Court entered its Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment and Setting Hearing on Damages and Denying Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Clerk’s Entry of Default and Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer (“April 23 Order”), which such order is incorporated herein for all purposes. Pursuant...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Petitioner Gyula Janos Jakubik (“Jakubik” or “Petitioner”) petitions this Court for the return of his daughter, D.T.J., to Hungary, pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Oct. 25, 1980, T.I.A.S. No. 11,670,1343 U.N.T.S. 89 (the “Convention” or “Hague Convention”) and its implementing legislation, the International Child Abduction ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Alissa Strouse (Plaintiff) brings this action under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act (FCEUA) against Enhanced Recovery Company, L.L.C. (Defendant). Defendant moved for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant in part and deny in part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. BACKGROUND...
Views: 0
Page 105356
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Previously, the defendant moved to strike the plaintiffs’ jury demand. The motion was premised on the explicit waiver provisions of the right to trial by jury in a series of promissory notes and a guaranty executed by the plaintiffs. See infra at 5, n. 4. However, the plaintiffs’ claims were based, not on those documents, but on the parties’ Stock and Membership Int...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED, that on July 26, 2013, the Court considered Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support, Dkt. No. 32; the response and reply Dkt. Nos. 59, 61; Defendant’s motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds not raised in the motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 62; the filings related to that motion, Dkt. Nos. 60, 62-63, 64-65;1 and the r...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
Criminal Action No. 12-132 (JDB)
GREGORY LORENG,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant Gregory Loreng pleaded guilt...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KINGMAN PARK CIVIC ASSOCIATION,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-990 (CKK)
VINCENT C. GRAY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(July 29, 2013)
...
Views: 0
OPINION
Pending before the Court is Relator Nicholas DePace’s Motion for Stay of Proceedings in the Court of Common Pleas of Pennsylvania (the “Motion for Stay”). (Dkt. No. 65.) For the reasons discussed below, Relator’s Motion for Stay will be denied.
I.
The only facts included herein are those relevant to the instant motion. More background can be found in the Court’s *566prior Opinion in this ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [# 10] AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [#8] AND CANCELLING JULY 29, 2013 HEARING I. INTRODUCTION Presently before the Court are Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, filed on April 1, 2013 and April 29, 2013. Defendant objects to Plaintiffs Motion on the basis of it being untimely, but in the interests of justice, the Court...
Views: 0
Page 105584
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court is Defendant Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority d/b/a Erlanger Medical Center’s (“Defendant” or “Erlanger”) motion to dismiss Relator’s amended complaint (Court File No. 53). Plaintiff Lisa K. Stratienko (“Plaintiff’ or “Relator”), on behalf of the United States of America (“United States”) and the State of Tennessee (col*850lectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Anthony Martin (“Mr. Martin”) initiated this job discrimination lawsuit arising under Title VII, § 1981, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) against EarthLink Shared Services, LLC (“Earth-Link”) on December 26, 2012. (Doc. 1). On April 19, 2013, EarthLink filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 14) (the “Rule 56 Motion”) asserting the af...
Views: 0
memorandum: opinion AND ORDER
Joe Taylor, Jeff Mayben, Lecil Harrelson, Jeff Morris, John A. Calvert, David Putman, and Derreck Sherrill are firefighters employed by the City of Gadsden (“the City”). They filed this putative class action lawsuit against the City and Gadsden Mayor, Sherman Guyton, in his official capacity. The complaint alleges that mandatory increases to their required pension co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Pending before the Court is Defendant Google Inc.’s (“Defendant”) motion for judgment on the pleadings under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). (D.I. 31) Defendant argues that Plaintiff buySAFE, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff’) U.S. Pat. No. 7,644,019 (“the ’019 patent”) is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because it is directed to non-patent-eligible subject matter. The parties completed briefing for this...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter comes before the Court upon Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Complaint, which is pleaded as a class action. Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and *582others similarly situated, alleges that Defendants have “caused to be sent thousands of unsolicited fax advertisements for goods and/or services without proper-opt-out notices,” in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Ac...
Views: 0
ENTRY DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
As the parties and the Court were gearing up for the trial scheduled in this case, the United States Supreme Court handed down Gunn v. Minton, -U.S.-, 133 S.Ct. 1059, 185 L.Ed.2d 72 (2013). In a letter dated February 21, 2013, Boston Scientific brought the decision to the Court’s attention and suggested that, pursuant to its holding, the Court lack...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, Donna Mulvihill, proceeding pro se, commenced this action on May 24, 2013. The original complaint names a single defendant, the State of New York (“State”). Mulvihill’s claims are generally based on certain actions of the Child Protective Services (“DPS”) unit of the Ontario County Department of Social Services (“DSS”) and its employees. Plaintiff alleg...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This action is brought by Anne M. Montesano against two defendants, Westgate Nursing Home, Inc. (“Westgate”) and Agnes Gaulin, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., and the New York State Human Rights Law (“HRL”), N.Y. Exec. Law, § 490 et seq. Plaintiff, a former employee of Westgate, alleges that due to her physical...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The instant “action seeking enforcement of rescission of a refinance mortgage credit transaction pursuant to the federal Truth-in-Lending Act” (“TILA”) was filed here on September 19, 2011. On May 31, 2012, all proceedings in this matter were stayed pending the conclusion of bankruptcy proceedings against the defendants. In January of this year, defendant J.P. Morgan Mortgage...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED COMPLAINTS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STRIKE CLASS ALLEGATIONS (D.E. 68), DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE (D.E. 84), AND DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF REPLY BRIEF (D.E. 86)
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaint...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 99-79 (RWR)
)
BURUDI FAISON, )
)
...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs Ana Lydia Vega-Santana (“Vega”) and Robert Villanua bring this suit for negligence, against the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) and several unidentified entities for injuries Vega sustained in New York’s Pennsylvania Station following a trip on an Amtrak train. Defendants now move for summary judgment on all of plaintiffs’ claims pursuant to Federal...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Craig Matthews, a member of the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”), brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of New York, NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly, Deputy Inspector Jon Bloch, and Lieutenant Mark Sedran (collectively, “defendants” or “the City”). Officer Matthews alleges that defendants violated his First Amendment rights when they,...
Views: 2
ORDER
This case is before the Court on defendant’s second motion to dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants defendant’s motion.
Background
On November 28, 2011, plaintiff Douglas Duane Somerson filed a complaint against World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (“WWE”), Vincent McMahon, and his wife Linda McMahon (“the McMahon defendants”), in the Superior Court of Fulton County,...
Views: 0
Page 106074
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff Agnes O’Connor-Goun brings this action against defendants Weill Cornell Medical College of Cornell University (“WCMC”) and Dr. Ronald G. Crystal under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., alleging that the defendants unlawfully terminated her employment with WCMC in retaliation for her blowing the whistle on the defendants’ fraudulent misuse of federal rese...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND *1005TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1005 II. LEGAL ANALYSIS.....................................................1006 A. Standard Of Review For Magistrate Judges’ Orders On NonDispositive Matters............................
Views: 0
Page 106209
ORDER ON APPEAL OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE DECISION
Before the Court are: Defendant’s Appeal of the Magistrate Judge Decision (ECF No. 62) and Motion For Leave To File Second Amended Answer (ECF No. 38). The Court has reviewed the entire record and held oral argument on July 16, 2013. For reasons explained herein, the Court now GRANTS IN PART Defendant’s Appeal and concludes the Motion for Leave to ...
Views: 0
Page 106223
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________
)
RICHARD JONES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-CV-1236(KBJ)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the City of St. Louis’s ordinances that require street performers to obtain a permit and pay a fee before performing in public spaces. I conclude that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their First Amendment claim that the ordinances grant excessive discretion to the administrator in choosing whe...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RUTHIE MICHELLE SWANSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1990 (BAH)
...
Views: 1
Page 106331
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CITY OF DOVER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 12-1994 (JDB)
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This case arises out of Plaintiff Darryl Maurice Robinson’s 2008 arrest by two Minneapolis police officers, Defendants Mark Lanasa and James Archer. Robinson asserts claims under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, alleging that the officers lacked probable cause to arrest him and subjected him to excessive force. Presently before the C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Karen Weigman filed this action against her former employer, Defendant Everest Institute (“Everest”), alleging she was terminated in violation of the Minnesota Whistleblower Act and public policy for confronting her supervisor about what she believed to be the forgery of internal documents. Everest now moves for summary judgment on Weigman’s claims, and, for...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand her lawsuit to the Rhode Island Superior Court sitting in Providence from whence it was removed by Defendant. Plaintiff Amanda Porter is a Rhode Island resident, while Defendant American Heritage Life Insurance Company is headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida. Defendant removed the case to the federal court, citi...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The Archdiocese of Milwaukee is in bankruptcy. One of the issues in this bankruptcy is whether the Archdiocese’s creditors, primarily clerical abuse victims who are represented by the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Committee”), appointed by the United States Bankruptcy Trustee, can access funds contained in the Archdiocesan Cemetery Trust. The Cemetery Trust, r...
Views: 0
Page 106462
DECISION AND ORDER
On August 15, 2012, James W. Giddens (the “Trustee”), as Trustee for the liquidation of the business of MF Global Inc. (“MFGI”) filed the Trustee’s Motion for Entry of an Order Approving Agreement to Cooperate with and Assign Certain Claims to Class Action Plaintiffs in Pending Actions and to Distribute Funds Recovered to Customers (“Trustee’s Motion”) with Judge Martin Glenn...
Views: 0
Page 106463
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FINDINGS OF FACT...........................................................434
I. THE PARTIES.........................................................434
II. II. RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS AND ITS TREATMENT ..................434
A. Rheumatoid Arthritis................................................434
B. Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis........
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Plaintiff Okey Azuike commenced this action against defendants BNY Mellon, Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Bank of New York Corp., and John Doe Corporations 1-10, asserting discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in employment on the basis of his color, race, and national origin. He also asserted claims for intentional and negligent infliction of emotiona...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case arises out of sewage backup up into a residence. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21) and a Motion to Reconsider (ECF No. 22) . For the following reasons, the Court *1179grants the Motion for Summary Judgment and denies the Motion to Reconsider.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs Ron and Jody Van Meter have owned and resided at a house located at ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The plaintiffs, Minh D. Nguyen and Esther Chung, filed this suit after Nguyen’s mortgage servicer, Seterus, Inc., conducted a nonjudicial foreclosure on their home. The Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) bought the home at the foreclosure sale. The plaintiffs sued Fannie Mae, Seterus, and foreclosure counsel Barrett Daffin Frappier Turner and Engel, LLP1 in ...
Views: 1
Memorandum and Order to Broadcast Summary Judgment Hearing
The parties are directed to arrange for audio broadcasting of the summary judgment heai’ing scheduled for November 14, 2013. If practicable, video live-streaming of the hearing shall be provided. Reception shall be in a communal room at Prospect Park Residence where putative class members may listen to and/or view the proceedings. See ECF...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO APPLY THE SUBSTANTIVE LAW OF HAWAII, DOC. NO. 406
I. INTRODUCTION
On June 1, 2012, Plaintiffs Robert and Joyce Cabasug (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action asserting claims for negligence, strict liability, breach of warranty, loss of consortium, and punitive damages against twenty-five Defendants that manufactured, sold and/or supplied various products containing ...
Views: 0
Page 106680
*692
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss)
This is a civil rights action against a number of law enforcement and public officials based in Westmoreland County and the Town of Colonial Beach. It is presently before the Court on Defendants Edward O’Shea III (“O’Shea”) and Jonathan Franklin’s (“Franklin”) Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10), filed on Ju...
Views: 0
*1266ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CERTIFY, DENYING MOTION TO CONTINUE, AND GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS This matter comes before the Court on several motions. Defendant LSI Title Agency brings a motion to dismiss all claims against them pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 10.) Defendant Asset Foreclosure Services joins the motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 11.) Defendants U.S. Bank and Mortgage Ele...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief seeking an order enjoining Defendant, the City of Evansville (“the City”), from permitting the erection on public property of a display of up to thirty-one, six-foot-tall crosses (“the Crosses”) to remain in place over a two-week period sponsored by and scheduled to be decorated by a group of local churches. On Jun...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is Defendants Waste Connections of Tennessee, Inc. (“Waste *811Connections”) and Victor Moore’s (“Moore”) (collectively, “Defendants”) February 11, 2013 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. (Motion, ECF No. 70); (see also Defs.’ Mem. in Supp. of Motion for Partial Summary J., ECF No. 70-1) (“Defs.’ Mem...
Views: 0
Page 106971
ORDER This matter is before the court upon the motion to dismiss by defendants Kathleen Sebelius, in her official capacity as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and Carolyn W. Colvin, in her official capacity as Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA). Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, the court grants the moti...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND STRIKE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendants County of Sutter, J. Paul Parker, David Samson, Norman Bidwell, Lou Anne Cummings, Amerjit Bhattal, Brent Garbett, Doris Brown, Melody Young, Kimberly Weiss, Gurkirat Bhangu, Christina Stohlman, Lester Eaton, Miguel Aguilar, Olga Tahara, Rosa Diaz, Eric Crawford, Baljinder Rai, Shane Dic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now pending before this Court is defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment, (ECF No. 36), and plaintiffs cross-motion for partial summary judgment. (ECF No. 40). A hearing was held on May 9, 2013. Both parties have submitted supplemental briefing at the Court’s request. (ECF No. 47; ECF No. 51; ECF No. 52). For the reasons set forth herein, both motions are GRANTED in p...
Views: 0
Page 107096
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRUCE HUBBARD, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Case No. 03-1062 (RJL)
...
Views: 0
Page 107097
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, Ghislaine Paul (“Plaintiff’), who is proceeding pro se, brings this action against the District of Columbia1 (the “Dis*152trict”) and Dr. Noubar A. Didizian (“Didizi-an”) (together “Defendants”), alleging that Defendants committed medical malpractice and violated various federal statutes in connection with the District’s termination of Plaintiffs worker’s compensatio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Document No. 5)
This case arises out of prior state court litigation in which Katie Graf (“Plaintiff’) *339sued Torda & Sons, Inc. (“Torcía”) and Ronald Lindsey, an employee of a restaurant operated by Torcía, for injuries she sustained there. Plaintiff received a judgment in her favor. The court then attached Torcia’s liquor li...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Aero Safety Graphics (“ASG”) moves, under 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 5011, to withdraw its administrative claim and objections made to it from reference to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York as part of case No. 1-12-40783-CEC, In re Global Aviation Holdings, et. al., now pending before the Honorable Carla E...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs Rachel Eastman, Academic Software, Budget Windows, John Pierson and *182AIA Enterprises (d/b/a Chesterfield Inn) move to certify a class of over 24,000 New Jersey merchants who entered into contracts for the acquisition of credit or debit card point-of-sale (“POS”) terminals with Defendants First Data Corporation and First Data Merchant Services (collectively, “First Data” or “...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court are the following motions: (1) Defendant Hosto & Buchan, PLLC’s (“Hosto”) motion for partial summary judgment (Court File No. 40); (2) Defendants Sherman Financial Group, LLC (“Sherman”), LVNV Funding, LLC (“LVNV”), Resurgent Capital Services, LP (“Resurgent”), and R. Scott Batson’s (“Batson”) (collectively, “LVNV Defendants”) joint motion for summary judgment (Court...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO STAY AND TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
Plaintiffs L & R Farms Partnership and James Steven Lewis (“Plaintiffs”) bring this action against Defendant Cargill Incorporated (“Cargill”) for fraud, violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-18-104 (“TCPA”), and a declaration that the parties’ contracts are void. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) On May 23, 2011, Cargill...
Views: 0
Page 107212
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
DENISE A. BANKS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 07-1807 (RWR)
)
TOM VILSACK, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT ANOVA FOOD, LLC’s MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF No. 112) AND DENYING DEFENDANT CLEARSMOKE TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF No. 113) AND DENYING DEFENDANT ANOVA FOOD, INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF No. 115) AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR AN INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b)
On January 2, 2012, Plaintiffs William R. Kowal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Geralyn Goodsite brings claims of retaliatory discharge against Defendants Norfolk Southern Railway Company (“Norfolk Southern”) and James Roskovics (“Roskovics”) (collectively, “Defendants”) under Title VTI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Ohio Revised Code § 4112 (Docs. 1 & 15). Retaliation claims brought under Ohio law are generally subj...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) [DE 10]. A hearing on this motion was held in New Bern, North Carolina on July 24, 2013 at 3:15 p.m. For the reasons stated herein, the defendant’s motion is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff (Mr. Daniels) was a crewmember on defendant’s ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the Motions of Plaintiff to Remand. Having considered the pleadings, the attachments thereto, as well as supporting and opposing authorities, the Court finds the Motions are not well taken and should be denied.
I. Factual Background and Procedural History
In June of 2012, the State of Mississippi, by and through its Attorney General, Jim Hood ...
Views: 1
Memorandum Opinion & Order
This matter is before the Court on the motion of Defendants Kathleen Sebelius in her capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and the United States of America to dismiss Plaintiff Cecelia A. Taransky’s putative class action Complaint for lack of jurisdiction, failure to...
Views: 0
Page 107557
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Keren Matana (“KM”) brings this action against defendants J. Ezra Merkin and Gabriel Capital Corporation (“GCC”) (collectively, “defendants”). KM invested $1.5 million in Ascot Fund Limited (“Ascot Fund”), an off-shore hedge fund managed by Merkin and GCC. Ascot Fund, in turn, invested substantially all of its assets with Bernard Madoff. KM’s investment was wiped out f...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NACS; NATIONAL RETAIL )
FEDERATION; FOOD MARKETING )
INSTITUTE; MILLER OIL CO.; )
BOSCOV'S DEPARTMENT STORE, )
LLC; and NATIONAL RESTAURANT )
ASSOCIATION, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AS MOOT; DENYING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES On June 19, 2013 Movant’s counsel moved to compel the United States to comply with this court’s March 11, 2013 order awarding attorney’s fees in the amount of $9,012.50. (Ct. Dkt. 24). The Government represents that payment has been processed by the U.S. Department of Treasury and received by Mova...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is currently pending for consideration of Defendant Clifford Leon Houston’s six motions to suppress evidence obtained from the warrantless surveillance of his property with a video pole camera, the January 11, 2013 search of his residence, and the seizure of his person on the same day. [Record Nos. 14, 16, 18, 20, 47, 57, 58] These motions were referred to...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO REOPEN DISCOVERY AND FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
[Dkt. Nos. 271, 285, 308 and related documents]
I.
INTRODUCTION
This Order addresses whether Plaintiff Richard Reinsdorf has presented sufficient evidence of discovery misconduct by Defendants Skeehers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II (collectively, “Skeehers”) to warrant the re-opening of discovery or othe...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
Before the Court, without oral argument, are Defendant Gregory P. Hawkins’ 12(b)(2) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, ECF No. 12, and Defendants Michelle and Robert Ferebauer, Patrick T. Roach, Lawrence Lincoln and Patricia McKay, and Hawkins’ 12(b)(6) Motions to Dismiss, ECF Nos 10, 48, 50, & 52. In addition to Hawkins’ personal ju...
Views: 0
Page 107699
MEMORANDUM ORDER
By “bottom-line” Order dated October 12, 2012, the Court, after full consideration of the parties’ briefing and oral argument, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint in the above-captioned case pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 23.1(b). This Memorandum Order explains that ruling and directs the entry of final judgment.
This case is a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Defendant Joseph Caramadre filed a Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea (the “Motion to Withdraw” or the “Motion”) in this matter. (ECF No. 122.) The Motion has been extensively briefed and was the subject of a four-day evidentiary hearing (the “Hearing”). For the reasons stated at the *165conclusion of the Hearing, and set forth in more detail herein, the Court found the Motio...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_______________________________________
)
EMMANUEL N. LAZARIDIS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 1
*870MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On July 9, 2013, the undersigned United States District Judge heard oral argument on Defendant United States Army Corps of Engineers’ (the “Corps”) Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 11]. Plaintiffs Hawkes Co., Inc. (“Hawkes”), Pierce Investment Co. (“Pierce”), and LPF Properties, LLC (“LPF”) filed this action seeking a declaratory judgment and injuncti...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff Vincent Burroughs, brings this action alleging negligence against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Acts (FTCA) and against former IRS revenue agent Dora Abrahamson pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents. Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the court dismissed the Bivens action against pro se defendant Abrahamson on May 31, 2013. Plaintiff alleges that defen...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Atoya Alexander (“Alexander”) brings this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, and the New York State and City Human Rights Laws, against Defendants the City of New York (the “City”), the New York City Police Department (the “NYPD”), Lieutenant Gatto and Sergeant Leroy.1 This Opinion addresses defendants’ motion to d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Came on for consideration in the above-captioned action the motion for judgment *722on the administrative record filed by plaintiff, R.C., by and through his next friends, S.K. and D.H. Defendant, Keller Independent School District, filed a response, and plaintiff filed a reply. Plaintiff challenges the decision of the Special Education Hearing Officer (“SEHO”) in t...
Views: 0
Page 107991
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
PAMELA LYLES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SERVICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 32BJ,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-cv-1608 (RLW)
v.
DIVERSIFIED SERVICES GROUP, INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORA...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter arises out of the methods by which Defendant UnitedHealth Group (“United”) (1) monitors and recoups benefit overpayments from a variety of healthcare providers, and (2) regulates reimbursement of services provided by chiropractors. On January 24, 2011, Plaintiffs Premier Health Center, P.C. (“Premier”), Judson G. Spran-del, II, D.C., Brian S. Hicks, D.C., Tri3 Enterprises, L...
Views: 1
*141OPINION
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of the proposed Settlement Agreement1 and Class Counsel’s Motion for attorney fees, reimbursement of expenses, and service award payments to the named Plaintiffs. The Court conducted a Fairness Hearing on July 17, 2013. Now, having considered the arguments by all parties to this matter, the Court sets forth ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS MATTER comes before the Court pursuant to the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (# 51, as amended # 52), Mr. Foreman’s response (# 59), and the Defendants’ reply (# 64).
FACTS
The Court briefly summarizes the facts here, and elaborates as necessary in its analysis. In March 2005, Mr. Foreman, a black m...
Views: 0
Page 108113
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a defamation action stemming from a profile of Plaintiff Peter Paul Biro, written by Defendant David Grann (“the Grann Article”), which appeared in the July 12-19, 2010 issue of the New Yorker magazine, published by Defendant Condé Nast, a division of Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. (“Advance”). In an opinion and order dated August 9, 2012, this Court examined each al...
Views: 5
OPINION
I. Introduction and Summary................................................372
II. Background.............................................................374
A. The Alleged Fraud Summarized.......................................374
B. Pre-Settlement Procedural History....................................374
1. Consolidation of Similar Suits and Appointment of Interim Lead Plaintiffs and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the plaintiff Progressive Gulf Insurance Company (“Progressive Gulf’)’s Motion for Summary Judgment (docket entry 13). Having carefully considered the motion, the response of defendants Infant Daughter of Paris Buckner, by and through Grade and Sonny Williams, and the Estate and/or heirs of Paris Buckner (collectively “the Buckner E...
Views: 0
ORDER1
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Court-Directed Alternative Service *687of Process. (Doc. 10). None of the defendants who have appeared in this ease have opposed the motion. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs motion is granted.
I. Background
On July 8, 2013, Plaintiff filed its Complaint for damages and injunctive relief against Defendant Rolando R. Quisca Astocahuana...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause is before the Court on the following: 1. Plaintiffs Motion for Remand (Doe. 16), filed April 29, 2013; 2. Defendant’s Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Remand and Memorandum of Law in Support (Doc. 19), filed May 16, 2013; and 3. Plaintiffs Reply to Defendant’s Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Remand (Doc. 24), filed May 31, 2013. *1345Upon considerati...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff CBS Outdoor, Inc. (“CBS”) brings this action against Defendants Village of Plainfield, Illinois (the “Village”) and Red River Plainfield, LLC (“Red River”) alleging violations of CBS’s constitutional rights to due process, equal protection of the law, and freedom of speech. Presently before the Court is the Village’s motion to dismiss the complaint for fai...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
STATE NATIONAL BANK of BIG )
SPRING et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
ZILYEN, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0433...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court on a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), brought by Defendant East Coast Cycles, Inc., a Delaware corporation whose principal place of business is also in Delaware. [Docket Item 11]. This case arises from a motorcycle accident allegedly caused by a defective throttle mechanism assembled ...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the court on the motion of Plaintiff Jeffrey Bright (“Plaintiff’) for class certification [Docket Item 41] and his motion to seal confidential documents [Docket Item 40]. The Defendant Asset Acceptance, LLC (“Defendant” or “Asset”) filed opposition to the motion for class certification. Oral argument was held on May 22, 2013.
In this action, Plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT In the present lawsuit, Plaintiff Aipperspach,1 the Personal Representative of Mahir Al-Hakim’s (“Al-Hakim”) Estate, alleges that Al-Hakim was subjected to excessive force when he was shot and killed by law enforcement officers on March 18, 2010 in Riverside, Missouri. Currently pending before the Court are summary judgment motions on behal...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Re: Dkt. Nos. 37, 40
This case arises from the showing of a pay-per-view program at a commercial establishment. Plaintiff Joe Hand Promotions sues four defendants for displaying a program at a commercial establishment without proper licensing, alleging causes of action for: violation of 47 U.S.C. section 605, violation of 47 U.S.C. section 553 and conversion....
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
On April 15, 2013, Plaintiffs Skye Astiana, Milan Babic, Tamara Diaz, Tamar Larsen, Kimberly S. Sethavanish (“Plaintiffs”) filed a motion for class certification.2 (Doe. No. 108.) On June 17, 2013, Defendant Kashi Company (“Kashi” or “Defendant”) filed its opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THERESA WESTON SAUNDERS,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 02-1803 (CKK)
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
Page 108482
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(August 2, 2013)
Before the Court is the motion of the defendant to dismiss this matter.
*1096I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On June 18, 1991, Herbert R. George (“Herbert George”); Marilyn Esther George (“Marilyn George”); and Ernest R. George (“Ernest George”) acquired as joint tenants, with survivorship rights, certain real property described as:
Parcel No. 60-U Estate B...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RoBERT ANI) CARLA I)oE, er aL, )
Plaintiffs, g
v. § civ. No. 05-1060 (TFH)
DISTRICT oF COLUMB!A, ezaz., § I L E D
Defendants. g (] 1
) °‘z;':'..::ii:§;zz::::t:"d
MEMoRANDUM oPlNloN
This case involves the one-day removal of two young children from an abusive home by
an agency specifically tasked with protecting abused children. This ...
Views: 0
On July 5, 2013, Defendant Professional Collection Consultants (“Defendant” or “PCC”) filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. No. 13.) On July 21, 2013, Plaintiff Mark C. Boon (“Plaintiff’ or “Boon”) filed his opposition. (Doc. No. 14.) On July 26, 2013, Defendant filed its reply in support of the motion. (Doc. No. 1...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Ward (‘Ward”) brought this action against Andrews McMeel Publishing, LLC (“AMP”) on October 26, 2012, asserting claims of copyright infringement, trade dress infringement, and common law unfair competition. On February 2, 2013, AMP moved to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS AMP’s motion to dismiss the t...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs Pearson Education, Inc. (“Pearson”), John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (“Wiley”), Cengage Learning, Inc. (“Cengage”), and The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (“McGraw-Hill”)1 bring claims of copyright infringement against pro se defendants Lazar Ishayev and Yelena Leykina, allegedly together doing business as “Solutions Direct,” “Solutions4Less,” “TextbookAnswers,” and/or “Solution...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court are the following motions: 1) a partial1 Motion for Summary Judgment (Clerk’s No. 35), filed by C. Line, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “C. Line”); and 2) a Motion for Summary Judgment (Clerk’s No. 47) filed by the City of Davenport (“Davenport”), Craig Malin (“Malin”), and Alan Guard (“Guard”) (collectively “Defendants”). Defendants filed a resistance (Clerk’s No. 46) to Plaintiffs ...
Views: 1
ORDER
The plaintiff brings this action against the defendants for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227, for the alleged placement of telephone calls to cell phones using an automatic telephone dialing system and prerecorded or artificial voice message. Currently before the court is defendant Citizens for Transportation Mobility’s (“CTM”) motion for judgm...
Views: 0
Page 108548
Memorandum, Order and Judgment Table of Contents I. Introduction.............................................................149 II. Facts and Procedural History..............................................149 A. Crime of Conviction and Trial .........................................149 B. Direct Appeal .......................................................150 C. State Section 440.10 Proceedin...
Views: 0
Page 108581
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Annette Torres and Patrick Boyle bring suit against Defendants Robert Deblasis, Anthony LaSalle, Alan Clarke,1 and the City of Philadelphia. Torres and Boyle allege that Defendants subject them to employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”), 43 Pa...
Views: 0
Page 108605
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
This lawsuit arises from claims for insurance payments relating to a medical device intended for pain relief. The device and related services were provided by Electrostim Medical Services, Inc. (“Electrostim”) to patients in different states and covered by different health-insurance plans, many issued by entities affiliated with Blue Cross Blue Shield. Electrostim sued Heal...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Martin Anderson brings this suit against Defendant Carmen Iacullo and the Illinois Department of Transportation (“IDOT”), alleging that Iacullo caused the termination of his employment at IDOT based on his political affiliation in violation of the First Amendment (Count I). Specifically, Anderson alleges he was fired from his position as the head of the Ele...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant CMH Homes, Inc. seeks to enforce a number of contractual limitations *684on the ability of its former employee, Plaintiff Kevin Mazurkiewiez, to assert claims related to his employment. While arbitration clauses are the most commonly litigated provisions in employment agreements limiting the right to sue, this case involves two others: (1) a provision shortening t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On February 26, 2013, the Plaintiff Arvinder Sodhi (the “Plaintiff’) brought this *254action against the Defendant Mercedes Benz Financial Services, USA, LLC (the “Defendant”) alleging that Mercedes Benz (1) violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (“FDCPA”); (2) breached a Settlement Agreement executed by the parties; and (3) negligently ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On February 26, 2013, Plaintiffs Kathleen Warshun and Lynette Tiger (the “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against their employer New York Community Bank (“NYCB”), NYCB’s parent corporation New York Community Bancorp. Inc. (“Bancorp”) (collectively the “Corporate Defendants”) and four high-level employees of NYCB.
The Plaintiffs, whose employment was terminated ...
Views: 0
Page 108729
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Jacob Hafter’s Motion to Reopen Case and for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Doc. # 46), filed on January 8, 2013. Defendants filed an Opposition (Doc. # 47) on January 25, 2013. Plaintiff filed a Reply (Doc. # 48) on February 4, 2013.
I. BACKGROUND
This action arises out of Nevada State Bar disciplinary proceedings against Plaintiff Jacob Ha...
Views: 0
ORDER
(Plf.’s Motion in Limine — dkt. no. 74; Def.’s Motions for Summary Judgment — dkt. nos. 81 and 82; Def.’s Motion to Seal — dkt. no. 87; Pit’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment — dkt. no. 84)
This is a civil rights suit arising out of the detention of a woman by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (“LVMPD”) on suspicion of prostitution during a Vice anti-prostitution sting operati...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Federal Insurance Company’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff TranSched Systems Limited’s Complaint. (ECF No. 10.) In its Complaint, TranSched seeks a declaration that Federal is liable under Rhode Island’s direct action statute, R.I. Gen. Laws § 27-7-2.2, and for statutory and/or common-law bad faith. Federal raises two arguments in its motion: 1) T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff T.G. Plastics Trading Co. Inc., d/b/a National Plastics Trading Co. (“National Plastics”) sued Defendant Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (“Toray”) for allegedly breaching the settlement agreement that arose from prior litigation. Toray countersued, also alleging a contract breach.
Although there are fourteen claims between the parties, in essence this is a claim by...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT TO ASSERT CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES
Before the court are defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 24) and plaintiffs motion to amend his complaint to add a claim for punitive damages (Doc. No. 26). For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is denied and plaintiffs motion is granted.
I. ...
Views: 0
Memorandum Order
Plaintiff Samantha Thomas (“Plaintiff’ or “Thomas”) brings this action against Defendants Public Storage, Inc. and PSCC, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants” or “PSCC”), asserting sex discrimination and retaliation claims pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., as well as New York State *498Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296 et seq., an...
Views: 0
Page 108935
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Catlin (Syndicate 2003) at Lloyd’s (“Catlin”)’s motion for summary judgment, (Docket No. 134), and San Juan Towing & Marine Services, Inc. (“SJT”)’s motion for summary judgment, (Docket No. 136). Having considered Catlin’s motion and memorandum of law, (Docket No. 135); SJT’s opposition, (Docket No. 140); and Catlin’s reply, (Docket No. 146); the Court GRANT...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Thomas F. Farb (“Plaintiff’) brought this action against the ex officio1 and private trustees2 of the Puerto Rico Science, Technology and Research Trust (“Trust”) in their individual and official capacities. (Docket No. 5.) This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), alleging violations of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT [16]
I. INTRODUCTION
On March 8, 2013, Plaintiff Jennifer Houston (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against Defendants Medtronic, Inc., and Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges that she suffered harmful side effects after undergoing lumbar surgery in which her surgeon used Defendants’...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
A hearing was held in the above-captioned matter on June 19, 2013. Plaintiff John Doe was represented by Bryan G. Smith and Vito R. de la Cruz; Defendants Corporation of the Catholic Bishop of Yakima, Diocese of Yakima, and Catholic Church of the Resurrection (collectively, “Defendants”) were represented by Thomas D. Frey. Befo...
Views: 0
*385MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On August 31, 2012, the Plaintiff Sirob Imports, Inc. (the “Plaintiff’) commenced this action against the Defendant Peerless Insurance Company (the “Defendant”), seeking a judgment against the Defendant for breach of contract based on a fire insurance policy (“the policy”). The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant unlawfully refused to pay for repairs to damag...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The parents of Y.T. — a child with autism in the New York City school system — filed this action against the New York City Department of Education (“DOE”) and other defendants, and are seeking a preliminary injunction to maintain Y.T.’s current 1:1 applied behavioral analysis (“ABA”) home services and also to add several new services to his educational placemen...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [56]
“Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life ... How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!”
—Arthur Miller, The Crucible
This case is about the reputational value of an individual’s name, and to what extent an individual has a right to request a hearing to contest governmentally imposed blemishes ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on defendant Jose Armando Bran’s (“Bran”) MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL (Docket No. 290). For the reasons set forth herein, the motion will be denied.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On December 4, 2012, Bran was charged in a Second Superseding Indictment with *488Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. ...
Views: 0
Page 109062
ORDER:
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff National Steel and Shipbuilding *1267Company’s (“NASSCO”) motion for partial summary judgment [Doc. No. 22], and Defendant Century Indemnity Company’s (“Century”) motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 21]. The parties each filed opposition...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ SECOND MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
On June 21, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. (Doc. # 18.) R. Chris Pittard, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs; Craig Wood, Esq., and Stacy Castillo, Esq., appeared on behalf of Defendants. After reviewing the M...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING CLASS CERTIFICATION
This case has traveled a long road. Plaintiffs have spent over twelve years pursuing their claims that Wal-Mart discriminated against them and other women in making pay and promotion decisions. For a while, they succeeded in prosecuting the suit as a class action encompassing the claims of some 1.5 million women around the country. But the Supreme Court was not i...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [Re Docket No. 29] Abigayil Tamara is a qualified disabled person who uses a service dog for independence and mobility. El Camino Hospital refused to allow her service dog to accompany her during a 2011 stay in its locked psychiatric ward. She sues for this alleged violation of her civil rights under federal and state law. Now, Tamara ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants Energizer Holdings, Inc., et al., have filed a motion to dismiss the first *1211amended complaint without leave to amend. Plaintiff Aida Corra has filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. For reasons discussed below, Defendants’ motion shall be granted...
Views: 0
Page 109122
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Motion to Dismiss)
Brandon Raub (“Raub”) was detained for a mental health evaluation after he was arrested by Chesterfield County, Virginia, police officers, acting in concert with federal authorities and mental health professionals. Both a state-court magistrate and a special justice found probable cause for his detention, but a state court judge ultimately reversed the det...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT ELSEN’S MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF Nos. 42, 49, 60)
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS BLACKSTONE AND ELSEN’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Rosario Alonso filed this action on October 10, 2011. (ECF No. 1.) The action is currently proceeding on the first amended complaint, filed February 26, 2013, against Defendants Blackstone Financ...
Views: 0
Page 109152
*1089MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING THE COMMISSIONER 1. PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff seeks review of the Commissioner’s final decision denying his application for Social Security Supplemental Security Income benefits (“SSI”). The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Stip...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER Plaintiff Andrew Park (“Plaintiff’) brings this putative consumer class action lawsuit (the “Instant Action”) against Defendant Dole Fresh Vegetables, Inc. (“Dole” or “Defendant”) pursuant to California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq., and California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”), Civil Code §...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM, OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is CASCO’s motion to deposit funds pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 67. (Docket No. 39.) John Deere (“JD”) opposed, claiming Rule 67 is inapplicable in this instance. (See Docket No. 45 at 2.) For the following reasons, the court agrees and DENIES CASCO’s motion at Docket No. 39.
I. Pertinent Background
CASCO brought this actio...
Views: 0
*1055NONJURY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter is before the court following a nonjury trial held on June 3, 2013. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52, the court makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The government filed a' forfeiture action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1345, alleging that the defendant currency is proceeds from drug-related activity. Tara Mishra filed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
Before the Court are respondents Ana Lopez, the warden of the Bayamon Detention Center, and the attorney general of Puerto Rico’s (“respondents”) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, (Docket No. 77), and respondents’ motion in compliance with the Court’s order to show cause, (Docket No. 83). For the following reasons, the Court DENIES respondents’ motio...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this criminal case, concluded over six years ago, defendant The Purdue Frederick Company, Inc. (“Purdue”), requests the court to enjoin the Attorney General of Kentucky (the “Attorney General”) from litigating certain claims on behalf of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (the “Commonwealth”) in a civil action pending in that state’s courts.1 Purdue argues that its guilty plea in this case, ...
Views: 0
*1199
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
The ultimate outcome of this probation-violation matter hinges largely on the meaning of the verb “hunt.” This is something the defendant, William Spann, who’s a professional big-game hunter, was specifically prohibited from doing anywhere in the United States for six months following his recent conviction in this court on a deer-hunting offense.
On Ju...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court is in receipt of the attached joint letter, dated July 17, 2013, from Plaintiff, Defendant Midland Funding, LLC (“Midland”); Defendants Peter T. Roach & Associates, P.C., Peter T. Roach, and Timothy J. Murtha (the “Roach Defendants”); and non-party Eltman, Eltman & Cooper, P.C. (“EEC”), regarding EEC’s claim of privilege over (1) its collection agreement with Midland and (2) a d...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANTHONY CLARK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Case...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBlA
RODNEY ARMSTEAD,
Plaintiff,
V' Civil Action No. 12-1110 (CKK)
SALLY JEWELL,
Defendant.
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION]
(August 5, 2013)
Plaintiff Rodney Armstead filed suit against Sally Jewellz in her official capacity as the
Secretary of the Interior, alleging he was not selected for a position as an Engineering Equipment
Operator for t...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MESAFINT BEYENE,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 08-1972 (BJR)
v. MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTION
FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF
HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Samuel N. Edeh’s Appeal [Doc. No. 154] of Magistrate Judge Janie S. Mayeron’s April 23, 2013, Order [Doc. No. 150] granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted, Motion to Extend Discovery Deadline as to Plaintiff Only, and Motion to Increase...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint brought by Defendants Best Buy Co., Inc. (“Best Buy” or the “Company”), Brian J. Dunn (“Dunn”), Jim Muehlbauer (“Muehlbauer”), and Mike Vitelli (“Vitelli”) (Doc. No. 65). For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion in part and denies the motion in part.
BACKGRO...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on (1) Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [78], (2) Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Michael B. Mazis, Ph.D. [76], (3) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Damages [70], (4) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude the Opinions of Robert A. Hutchins, CPA, as to a Reasonable Royalty [69], (5) Defendant’s Motion to Exc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
I. Introduction
In the above-entitled action, Horace Jeffrey Allen (“Plaintiff”) claims his former employer, Southern Communications Services, Inc., doing business as SouthernLINC Wireless (“SouthernLINC”), retaliated against him for filing complaints in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and the Fair Labor Standards Act o...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
JOSEPH D. AFRAM, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1389 (RWR)
)
UNITED ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motions for summary of judgment of the defendants Durwin Martin (“Martin”) (Doc. 43), Police Chief Michael Williams *1294(“Chief Williams”) and the City of Mobile (Doc. 39), plaintiff Carlos Black’s (“Black”) response (Doc. 48), and the defendants’ replies. (Docs. 52, 54).
On May 22, 2012, Black filed a complaint against Martin, Chief Williams and th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On November 26, 2010, the Plaintiffs John Vacca, David Perez, Kirk Conaway, and Roy Kohn as Trustees of the Health Fund 917 and the Local 917 Pension Fund and the Health Fund 917 and the Local *409917 Pension Fund (collectively the “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against the Defendants Central Parking System of New York, Inc. (“Central”) and John Doe (collecti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On January 9, 2013, the Plaintiff Carvant Financial LLC (the “Plaintiff’ or “Carvant”) commenced this action sounding in breach of contract in Supreme Court, Nassau County. On February 15, 2013, the Defendants AutoGuard Advantage Corporation, d/b/a Amerigard (“Auto-guard”), Dimension Service Corporation (“Dimension”), and American Bankers Insurance Company (“Ameri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
(Dkt. Nos. 21 & 23)
I. INTRODUCTION
In this one-count class action complaint, Plaintiffs, who own life insurance policies issued by Defendant Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“MassMutual”) on the lives of persons other than themselves, allege that for at least the past fifty years Defendants have breached their fiduciary ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the court are defendants KPMG, a Hong Kong Partnership (“KPMG HK”); KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG Int’l”); KPMG LLP (“KPMG US”); Hansen, Barnett, and Maxwell, P.C. (“Hansen”); and Morgan Stanley & Co.’s (“Morgan Stanley”) respective motions to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(1). (Docs. # 124, 126, 127, 128, 129). Plaintiffs Oa...
Views: 0
ORDER
Timothy McKee’s Second Amended Complaint (SAC), (Doc. 20). The Court grants the Motion to Strike and denies the Motion to Dismiss for the reasons described below.1
BACKGROUND2
■ McKee worked as a physical education teacher • in Defendant Peoria Unified School District for nine years. (Doc. 20 ¶ 16.) On May 5, 2010, one of the students drowned .during a free swim period that McKee supervised...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOHN DOE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1807 (JDB)
U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION and
COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER
SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On July 16, 2008, plaintiff Kathryn Blythe brought this action against the City of New York, the New York City Department of Education (“DOE”), two employees of the DOE — Principal Rafaela Espinal-Pacheco and Assistant Principal Vicky Broadhurst — in their individual capacities (collectively “DOE defendants”), and New York Police Department (“NYPD”) Officer Bijou Mathew in hi...
Views: 0
*1007
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S RULE 56(d) REQUEST FOR FURTHER DISCOVERY
For the following reasons, the Court hereby GRANTS IN PART Delta’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court GRANTS summary judgment to Delta on Mr. Kocsis’s claims based on theories of disparate impact or “pattern-or-practice.” The Court also, however, GRANTS Mr. K...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Through this action, Plaintiff Richard D. Bagley (“Bagley”) seeks a refund of feder*985al income taxes paid by him in the amount of $3,874,407 with respect to the 2003 tax year. From 1994 through 2003, Bagley, on behalf of the United States of America (“government”), prosecuted TRW Inc. (“TRW”) for false claims under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiffs The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. and The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (collectively “NASDAQ” or the “Plaintiffs”) have moved to enjoin an arbitration filed by defendant UBS Securities LLC (“UBS” or the “Defendant”), and UBS has cross-moved to dismiss NASDAQ’s complaint (the “Complaint”) with prejudice.
Upon the facts and conclusions set forth below, NASDAQ’s motion for preliminary injun...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff K. Oliver was a well-paid, long time employee of Microsoft who had done well at the company. In the Fall of 2011, Oliver and four other female employees filed an internal discrimination complaint against her supervisor, John Halliwell, and a regional vice president. In the investigation that followed, Halliwell was found to have...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE. COURT is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. *116617). Plaintiff has filed a Response (ECF No. 29) and Defendants have filed a Reply (ECF No. 37). Oral argument was heard on July 12, 2013. Erica Shelley Nelson appeared for Plaintiff. Sean David Jackson argued on behalf of Defendants. The court allowe...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Before the court is the motion of defendant Taco Bell Corporation (“Taco Bell”) for partial summary judgment, filed pursuant to the court’s September 17, 2012 order modifying the case management plan. The motion, which Taco Bell filed on March 4, 2013, was fully briefed on March 25, 2013. However, at the parties’ request, the court del...
Views: 0
Page 109894
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Sterling Financial Corporation (“Sterling”), Harold B. Gilkey, and Daniel G. Byrne’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Consolidated Complaint, ECF No. 46. Defendants ask the Court to dismiss Plaintiff City of Roseville Employees’ Retirement System’s consolidated class action ...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the Court, without oral argument, is Defendants Department of the Interior (“DOI”), Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”), Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”), Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (“BSEE”), Office of Natural Resources Revenue (“ONRR”), Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), Lisa P. Ja...
Views: 0
*546
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Judith Scott (“Scott” or “Plaintiff’) filed this action against her former employer, Montgomery County School Board (“the Board”), asserting a number of employment-related claims. Her Complaint does not list separate counts, but contains a joint title listing her claims, to wit: “Claim for religious harassment, discrimination, retaliation and wrongful discharge...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 26, 2013, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission *907(“SEC”) filed a three-count Complaint against Defendants A Chicago Convention Center, LLC (“ACCC”), Anshoo Sethi (“Sethi”), and Intercontinental Regional Center Trust of Chicago, LLC (“IRCTC”), alleging violations of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C § 77q(a)(l)-(a)(3) (the “Securities...
Views: 0
Page 109943
MEMORANDUM
In this civil action invoking this court’s diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging that two groups of attorneys committed legal malpractice related to their representations of Plaintiff in connection with a property settlement agreement and legal malpractice action arising therefrom. Presently before the court are two motions. (See Do...
Views: 0
Page 109945
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs — Kelly and Daniel W., alongside their minor son, Tyler W. — bring this action against defendant, the Upper Perkiomen School District (the “District”), alleging that defendant failed to provide Tyler *429a free appropriate public • education (“FAPE”) in contravention of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. (“IDEA”), section 504 of the Re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court are cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff filed the first motion, which seeks partial summary judgment with respect to the invalidity of the Methadone Prohibition Policy at issue in this case. (Doc. 84). Defendants filed the second motion, which contends that no genuine issues of material fact exist and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. (...
Views: 0
*663
ORDER: (1) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (2) DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment brought by Defendants Bank of America, N.A., Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., and ReconTrust Company, N.A. (collectively, “Defendants”) and a Motion for Summary Judgment brought by Plaintiffs John F. Svoboda and Ri...
Views: 1
Page 110082
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MALLA POLLACK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MICHAEL ZUCKMAN, on behalf of himself
and the General Public of the District of
Columbia,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1978 (JDB)
MONSTER BEVERAGE CORP.,
Defendant.
MEMORA...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY ALL DEFENDANTS EXCEPT NABIL HAWILY
Plaintiff Christine Schmidt rented a house in Dearborn, Michigan from defendant Nabil Hawily. In March 2008, in the midst of an apparent rent dispute, Hawily secured the assistance of Dearborn city police officers, who arrested Schmidt and removed her from the house without a warrant or other legal proc...
Views: 1
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the “FDCPA”) prohibits debt collectors from using any “unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692f. Plaintiff Courtney Douglass, a resident of Pottstown, Pennsylvania, was sent a debt collection letter by Defendant Convergent Outsourc*442ing.1 Plaintiff contends that the envelope whi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 4, 2012, plaintiff Telecomm Innovations, LLC (“plaintiff’) filed this patent infringement action against defendants Ricoh Company, Ltd. (“Ricoh”), Ricoh Americas Corporation (“Ricoh Americas”), Lanier Worldwide, Inc. (“Lanier”), *392and Savin Corporation (“Savin”) (collectively “defendants”). (D.I. 1) Plaintiff alleges that certain technical support a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Nexans Inc. (“Nexans”) filed this declaratory judgment and patent infringement action against Belden Inc., Belden Technologies, Inc., and Belden Technologies, LLC (collectively, “Belden”). (D.I. 5) Nexans seeks declaratory judgment of noninfringement and invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,074,503 (“the ’503 patent”), 7,135,641 (“the ’641 patent”), and 7,...
Views: 0
*526
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Rafael Lee brings this action against debt collectors, Kucker & Bruh, LLP (“K & B”) and Alan D. Kucker (together “Defendants”), alleging that they violated the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”),- by misrepresenting that Mr. Lee was delinquent in his rent obligations. Defendants move for summary judgment, arguing that they ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
After not being promoted to the position of a supervisor, plaintiff John E. Cross filed a complaint with the Utah Labor Commission, alleging that defendant Valley Services, Inc. (‘Valley Services”) discriminated against him based on his disability. Subsequently, Valley Services issued written warnings to Mr. Cross for behavior that allegedly violated c...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS1 FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before this Court are Plaintiff, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London (“Lloyd’s”), and Defendants, William Paniagua, Crane Contractors LLC d/b/a Contractors Inc. (“Crane”), CLK Multi Family Management, LLC (“CLK”), and Consolidated American Services, Inc. d/b/a Creek-stone Apartments’ (“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On September 8, 2010, John T. Corpac, on behalf of himself and a putative class (the “class” or the “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against the Defendant Rubin & Rothman, LLC (the “Defendant”) pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. (the “FDCPA”). The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant violated the FDCPA by sending writt...
Views: 0
ORDER
The court has before it defendant’s motion to dismiss Counts 1 and 3 of plaintiffs’ amended complaint (doc. 20), plaintiffs’ response (doc. 25), defendant’s reply (doc. 28), plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a second amended complaint (doc. 24), defendant’s response (doc. 30), plaintiffs’ reply (doc. 31), defendant’s motion for leave to file an additional response (doc. 32), the proposed...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on defendants’ motions to dismiss and for judgment on the pleadings. A hearing was held before the undersigned on the motion to dismiss on May 2, 2013. Both motions now having become ripe for review, the Court denies the pending motions.
BACKGROUND
The facts as alleged in plaintiff’s complaint are as follows. Plaintiff is a psychiatrist who retired from...
Views: 0
ORDER
The matter before is Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [# 27],1 filed May 14, 2013. With the consent of the magistrate judge, I withdraw the prior Order of Reference [# 28], filed May 14, 2013, and grant the motion.
*1280I. JURISDICTION
I have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) (Fair Debt Collection Practices ...
Views: 0
Page 110600
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This is an insurance coverage action in which the Plaintiff Suffolk Federal Credit Union (“Suffolk”) alleges that the Defendant CUMIS Insurance Society, Inc. (“CUMIS”) breached the terms of the parties’ fidelity bond (the “Bond”) by refusing to indemnify Suffolk for losses arising from a fraud committed by Suffolk’s loan servicer, CU National Mortgage, LLC (“CU Na...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Yukos Capital S.A.R.L. (“Yukos Capital”) seeks enforcement of an arbitration award issued in its favor against OAO Samaraneftegaz (“Samaraneftegaz”) by the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) in New York. On September 25, 2012, the parties cross moved for summary judgment. Samaraneftegaz argues that the Court should grant ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On April 26, 2013, the Court held a hearing in this matter regarding the failure of Nicholas Penkovsky (“Penkovsky”), attorney for certain plaintiffs in this action, to pay sanctions imposed on him by Order dated April 10, 2012 in the amount of $5,000 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (“Rule 11”). At the hearing, the Court ordered Penkovsky to pay, either in full ...
Views: 1
*1184ORDER Presently before the Court is whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff Namit Bhatnagar’s (“Bhatnagar”) claims against Defendant Medco Health, LLC (“Medco”), an issue remanded to this Court by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Doc. # 27). On February 26, 2013, Bhatnagar filed a Brief Regarding Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. # 29), which...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND APPOINTMENT OF CLASS COUNSEL, SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Re: ECF No. 81
Plaintiff Marie Gaudin (“Plaintiff’) alleges that Defendant Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. (“Defendant”) offered her a Trial Period Plan (“TPP”) loan modification document pursuant to the federal Homeowners Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”), and then ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLE’S MOTION DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
Re: ECF No. 38
Before the Court is Defendant Apple, Ine.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint. Mot., ECF No. 38. The Court previously dismissed Plaintiffs *914First Amended Complaint with leave to amend. ECF No. 28; Pirozzi v. Apple, Inc., 913 F.Supp.2d 840 (N.D.Cal.2012) (“Pirozzi I...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magis*627trate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. # 17), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recomm...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order. (ECF No. 3.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs motion and DISMISSES *1046this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
I.
The following facts are undisputed, unless otherwise indicated. Plaintiff, Autumn Health Care of Zanesville, Inc. d/b/a Autumn Health C...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION, GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In this matter, Plaintiffs allege Defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices *518Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., through its practice of retroactively imposing post charge-off interest on consumer debts ...
Views: 0
ORDER
In this case, Plaintiffs Edward Gonzalez, Orlando Ybarra, Patricia Gonzales, Reynaldo Guerra, Sandra Puente, Thomas Berg, and James Rodriguez (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) challenge the legality of the redistricting plan adopted by the Harris County Commissioner’s Court on August 9, 2011, known as Revised Plan A-l, which reapportions voters among Harris County’s four commissioner precincts...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
WILLIAM R. BROOKS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 110863
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Cynthia Orienti seeks review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 403(d)(2), and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Act 42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(A). Ms. Orienti asks the co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
I. Introduction
In the above-entitled action, Beverly Lane Dexter (“Plaintiff’) claims her former employer, Amedisys Home Health, Inc. of Alabama (“Amedisys”), discriminated and retaliated against her for filing complaints based on her age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) when it created a hostile work environment and constructively d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Robert Hatmaker (“Plaintiff’) brought this action on May 2, 2012, seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”) denying Plaintiff a period of disability, disability insurance benefits (“DIB”), and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423, 1382. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Melissa Ren’e Kennedy (“Plaintiff’) brought this action on June 1, 2012 seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”) denying Plaintiffs claim for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1382. The Court referred the matter to United States Magistrate Judge Susan K. Lee,...
Views: 1
Page 111000
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
LIBBY A. DEMERY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Dorotheia Glover filed her complaint on May 17, 2011. (D.I.l). The *422Complaint asserts claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for “Fourth Amendment Malicious Prosecution,” “Fourth Amendment Unlawful Detention,” “Fourth Amendment Use of Excessive Force,” and “Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection” against Defendants City of Wilmington and Master Corporal Gerald J. Con-...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the court is Defendant Bosch Security Systems, Inc.’s Motion to Transfer the case to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. (Docket No. 40). For the reasons discussed, and after analyzing all the factors provided by 28 U.S.C. sec. 1404(a), the court DENIES the Motion.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Canatelo, LLC (hereafter “Plaintiff’ or “Canatelo”) is a Puerto Rico ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the court is the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (doc. 20), memorandum and evidence in support of said motion (docs. 21 and 22), to which the plaintiff has failed to respond.1 Having considered the pleadings, evidence and memorandum of the defendant, the court finds as follows:
I. Factual Background
Plaintiff sues his past employer for violation of Titl...
Views: 1
*1297
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 19) filed by Defendant Keystone Foods, LLC, d/b/a Equity Group — Alabama Division (“Equity”). The court has considered the arguments made in Equity’s “Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment” (Doc. 20) and in its Reply brief (Doc. 22). Plaintiff Saniya Parris (“Ms. Parris”), who is proceeding pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 13], which was heard on May 17, 2013. In her Complaint, Plaintiff asserts claims of discrimination based on sex in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Count 1); disability discrimination in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act,1 failure to accommodate, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in one action {Gustafson) move to centralize this litigation in the Central District of California, and request separation and remand of claims concerning two unrelated insurance products in one action.1 This litigation currently consists of five actions pending in four districts as listed on Schedule A.2 The action...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On November 14, 2011, the Plaintiff Robert S. Buckley (the “Plaintiff’), a former bus driver for the Defendant State University of New York (“SUNY”) from the beginning of 2004 until his termination in June 2010, commenced this action against SUNY and related parties for violations of several federal laws. In addition, the Plaintiff brought several New York State l...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
In December 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filed an enforcement action against plaintiffs BioChernies, Inc. (“BioChemics”) and John Masiz, alleging they had violated the federal securities laws. Plaintiffs have now sued defendant AXIS Reinsurance Company (“AXIS”),1 which issued their directors and officers (“D & 0”) liability insurance. Plaintiffs cl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for failure to comply with Rule 23.1’s shareholder derivative demand requirement and Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim. (Docs. 40, 43.) This case concerns the activities of a Nevada corporation’s board of directors (“the Board”) in connection with their management decisions and public stat...
Views: 0
OPINION
INDEX
I. Background.............................................................525
II. Prior Proceedings........................................................526
A. Guerrero’s Initial Rule 29/33 Motion....................................526
B. The Instant Rule 29/33 Motion.........................................526
1. The April 4, 2013 Hearing ........................................
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, and DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILESURREPLY
THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed May 14, 2013 (Doc. 37), and Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Surreply, filed July 24, 2013 (Doc. 49). Having reviewed the parties’ briefs and applicable law, I find that D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On May 8, 2012, plaintiff Joseph E. Tiraco (“Plaintiff’), proceeding pro se, commenced this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief against the New York State Board of Elections (the “State Board”) for alleged violations of his constitutional rights under the United States Constitution. (See ECF No. 1, Complaint dated 5/8/12.) On June ...
Views: 1
Page 111511
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Feldman’s Medical Center Pharmacy, Inc. (“Feldman’s”) and Pharmacy Management Associates, LLC (“PMA”) (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) sued CareFirst, Inc. (“CareFirst”) and others (collectively, the “Defendants”)1 in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, alleging intentional interference with economic relations and other state claims. Independence and QCC removed the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the Court is the motion for judgment on the pleadings or in the alternative for reconsideration nunc pro tun (doc. 116) of Defendant First National Bank of Mifflintown. The motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for our review. For the reasons that follow, we will grant the motion in its entirety.
I. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff John Steele (“Plaintif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on Defendant City of Elgin’s (City) motion to dismiss, and Plaintiff The Life Center, Inc.’s (Life Center) motion for summary judgment on Count I. For the reasons stated below, the City’s motion to dismiss is denied and Life Center’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
BACKGROUND
Life Center contends that it operates TLC Pregnancy Services ...
Views: 0
Page 111559
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff Denise A Banks filed a five-count amended complaint against the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) alleging that she was discriminated and retaliated against on the basis of race, sex, and age on a number of occasions. In anticipation of trial, the parties filed on May 28, 2013 their pretrial materials, including their schedules of witne...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is Defendant DIRECTV Customer Service, *1024Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 42) filed March 14, 2013, and Plaintiff Shane D. Hutchins’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 48), filed March 15, 2013.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Shane D. Hutchins (“Plaintiff’ or “Hutchins”) filed his First Amended Verified Complaint...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION
Plaintiff Barry Robinson (“Plaintiff’) filed this action against BGM America, Inc., d/b/a Beneteau USA, Inc., (“Defendant”) alleging claims against his former employer for race discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) and the South Carolina Human Affairs Law, S.C.Code Ann. §§ 1-1...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111664: United States ex rel. TBH & Associates, LLC v. Wilson Construction Co.
Page 111664
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This contract dispute relates to construction of the McNary-John Day Transmission Line (the “Project”) by the Bonneville Power Administration (“BPA”). The defendant Wilson Construction Co. was general contractor for the Project. The defendant Western Surety Company issued a surety bond for Wilson relating to the Project. (The defendants are...
Views: 0
Page 111667
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises from the payment of the late William Harmon’s life insurance proceeds to his daughter, Defendant Legh Ann Harmon. The deceased’s widow, Plaintiff Patricia Harmon, claims that Legh Ann and her boyfriend, Defendant Xavier Lee, deceived William into changing the primary beneficiary of the life insurance policy from Patricia to Legh Ann while William was incomp...
Views: 1
Page 111681
OPINION
Currently before the Court for disposition is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 56 and Western District of Pennsylvania Local Rule 56.1 (ECF No. 30). In this employment discrimination case, Plaintiff, Vivian Bush, asserts that her supervisor refused to allow her to return to her job as a Postal Service Supervisor of Customer Service while wearing an open-t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION ■ AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, PennEnvironment and Sierra Club, bring this citizens suit pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(a)(1) (Clean Water Act or CWA), section 7002(a)(1)(B) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6972(a)(1)(B) (RCRA), and section 601(c) of the Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law, 35 P.S. § 691.601(c) (CSL), against...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Kerzner Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the Alternative, Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Plaintiffs’ Punitive Damages Count (the “Motion”) [DE 122], The Court has carefully considered the Motion [DE 122], Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition [DE 131], and Defendants’ Reply [DE...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
ELENA M. GARABIS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Magistrate Judge submitted his Report and Recommendation on Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification. The parties were afforded due opportunity pursuant to statute and the rules of this Court to file objections; none were filed. The Court, having considered the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report a...
Views: 0
Page 111765
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
1. INTRODUCTION
This matter is brought pursuant to §§ 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) & 1383(c)(3), to review a final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security denying the plaintiffs claim for Social Security Disability benefits. The parties have filed their briefs, including the Administrative Record on Appeal, and the...
Views: 0
Page 111786
MEMORANDUM
Before the Court are four appeals from orders issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee (Rucker, J.): (1) the March 30, 2012 Order granting the Trustee’s motion for contempt (Case No. 12-ev-164; Court File No. 1-27); (2) the March 30, 2012 Order granting the Trustee’s motion to dismiss the removed State Court Action against the Trustee only (C...
Views: 0
*792 MEMORANDUM Defendant Richard Black (“Defendant”) has filed a motion to dismiss the indictment (Court File No. 12). The Government submitted a response in opposition to Defendant’s motion (Court File No. 13), and Defendant submitted a reply (Court File No. 17). The Court held a hearing on June 17, 2013, at which time the parties argued their positions and requested additional time to brief a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
The Plaintiffs, Shoreline Alliance, an unincorporated association (sometimes referred to herein as the “Association”) 1; David and Carole Merritt; Judy Barnhill; *893Larry and Marilyn Halters; Judy Denmon; Katharine Haskins; Jewell Snelling; Eddie McGregor; Charles and Betty Whitlow; Wayne and Nancy Courtney; Denise Wilson (col...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
If ever there were a case where the Court hoped that the “parties [would just decide] to chill,” Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., 296 F.3d 894, 908 (9th Cir.2002), this would be it. Indeed, it is an understatement to say that this case has been hotly contested, or that there is some animosity between the two business competitors involved. The parties have had a multitude of di...
Views: 0
Page 111835
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, patentholder Brandywine Communications Technologies, LLC (Brandywine) moves for centralization of this patent infringement litigation in the Middle District of Florida. Brandywine alternatively supports centralization of this litigation in a district in the central United States, such as the Northern District of Texas. This l...
Views: 0
Page 111865
ORDER
Before the Court are plaintiff Lawrence Halloran’s objections1 to the Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendation2 (“F & R”) denying plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment. Having reviewed de novo the record, the Magistrate’s F & R, the plain*613tiffs objections thereto, and the applicable law, the Court agrees ■ with the Magistrate’s recommendation and adopts the F & R as its opinion. The C...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are two motions by Basic Marine Services, Inc.: (1) motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs claims for unseaworthiness and Jones Act negligence; and (2) motion for partial summary judgment dismissing the.plaintiffs claims related to punitive damages for maintenance and cure and unseaworthiness. For the reasons that follow, the motions are GRANTED...
Views: 0
ORDER This case arises out of the alleged trading of unregistered securities. The Court has granted a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 6). For the reasons given herein, the Court vacates the previous order, replaces it with the present Order, and denies Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider (ECF No. 29). I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Defendant Banc de Binary, Ltd. is a Cypriot company with ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Richard and Victoria Silver-man (“Plaintiffs” or the “Silvermans”) bring this action containing sixteen (16) claims alleging violations of the New York General Business Law, breach of contract, fraud, negligence and numerous other vio1 lations of real property and banking laws, in connection with a refinancing loan on their property. Defendants Household Finance ...
Views: 0
Page 111973
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff WBCMT 2007-C33 NY Living, LLC brings this diversity action to foreclose on a $133 million mortgage against thirty-six LLCs (“Borrower Defendants”); a guarantor, David Kramer; and nine creditors who may possess security interests in the mortgage. The mortgaged properties include forty multi-family residential properties in New York. The Borrower Defendants move to di...
Views: 0
Memorandum and Order on Background of Assisted Living Industry in Preparation for Argument on Motions for Summary Judgment and Class Certification
Table of Contents
I. Introduction.............................................................310
II. Disclosure of Independent Research........................................310
III. Assisted Living Residences and Related Services.....................
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves claims against Defendant PricewaterhouseCoopers (“PWC”) under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. (2000) (“ERISA”), relating to PWC’s Retirement Benefit Accumulation Plan for Employees of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“the RBAP”). Plaintiffs Timothy Laurent and Smeeta Sharon allege that the RBAP violates ERISA’s vesti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On June 14, 2012, the Plaintiff Kohl’s Department Stores (“Kohl’s” or the “Plaintiff’), the Plan Administrator for the Kohl’s Group Health Plan (the “Plan”), commenced this action against the Defendants Fred Castelli (“Castelli”) and Lite & Russell (collectively, the “Defendants”). The Plaintiff commenced this action to enforce the terms of the “Plan” and for equi...
Views: 0
Page 111987
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Bernice Yu (“Yu”) commences this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)1 challenging the decision of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”), denying Yu’s application for Social Security disability insurance benefits.2 (Dkt. No. 1 (“Compl.”).) Yu moves for judgment on the pleadings, reversing the Commissioner’s decision and remanding for a new hearin...
Views: 0
*580
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, bring claims against Duane Reade, Inc. and Duane Reade Holdings (collectively, “DR”), asserting that DR failed to compensate its assistant store managers (“ASMs”) for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq. (“FLSA”), and the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
“Inveterate UCC geek[s]” are advised to draw near: On Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration, the Court must revisit this “classic” Article 9 case. Tim Zinnecker, You Had Me at “UCC” The Faculty Lounge (Apr. 1, 2013, 10:16 a.m.), http:// www.thefacultylounge.org/2013/04/you-hadme-at-uce.html.
Plaintiff and Defendant each claim to possess a superior interest in two truck chassis...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
RONALD S. BOSTER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this prescription drug product liability case, the plaintiff, Monica Ball, alleges that she suffered infertility and contracted Stevens-Johnson syndrome as a result of taking Dexilant, a drug manufactured, marketed, and distributed by the defendants (collectively, “Takeda”).
Nearly three years after sustaining her claimed injuries, and following repeated (and mostly unsucc...
Views: 0
Page 112146
ORDER “Self-defense is nature’s eldest law.” "John Dryden Just as an individual has a right to protect himself, the Court, too, has a right to protect itself (and scarce judicial resources) from abusive litigants who have repeatedly proven themselves to be a burden on the system by litigating a host of frivolous, vexatious, and malicious actions. The Court is in receipt of eleven pages from Manu...
Views: 0
Page 112161
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Anna Efimovna Khaldei brings this motion seeking sanctions for spoliation of evidence against defendant Kalman Kaspiev. Khaldei also seeks to reinstate Point II of her summary judgment motion. For the reasons stated below, these motions are denied.
I. BACKGROUND
A. The Nature of the Action and the Spoliation Allegations
This lawsuit concerns ownership of certain photog...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL Petitioner Rickey E. Weir’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence is dismissed for the following reasons. *1128I. A. In April and May of 2013, Weir filed a number of documents in his criminal case which indicated that a Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 might be filed soon. See Letter from Rickey Weir Requesting New Sentence [d/e 114], Verified Motion for the Entry of a...
Views: 0
Page 112230
OPINION
Petitioner Nancy Rish’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [d/e 1] is denied. But first, the facts.
I.
A.
In 1987, Petitioner was involved in a kidnapping in Kankakee, Illinois, that resulted in the death of the victim. The following facts are excerpted from the opinion of the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District:2
On September 2, 1987, Stephen B. Small, a wealthy resident of Kan...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (DE # 27) and Safeguard Properties, LLC (DE # 18) have both moved to dismiss Counts A, B, D, E, and F of plaintiffs Gerald Gordon and Tahara Brown’s complaint. For the following reasons, those motions are granted in part and denied in part.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On November 22, 2010, plaintiffs purchased property in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Eric and Shannon Backlund allege that Defendants Messerli & Kramer, P.A. (“M & K”) and M & K’s representative, Steve Doe (“Steve”), violated the *1012Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692' et seq. The Court granted in part Defendants’ previous motion to dismiss. M & K now brings a motion for summary judgment on the remaining claims...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court on the motion for summary judgment [862] filed by Plaintiffs Insituform Technologies, LLC and INA Acquisition Corp.
I. Background
This is a patent-infringement suit that began in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in November 2007. The original Plaintiffs were Insituform Technologies, Inc. and Insituform (Netherlands), B.V., Inc. Ins...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This is a wrongful termination case which arose after Plaintiff Teresa E. Banks was dismissed from her employment after filing a workers’ compensation claim. Defendant Argos Risk Management Services, LLC has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 18), to which Plaintiff has responded in opposition (Docket No. 20), and Defendant has replied (Docket No. 23). For the following ...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania action moves to centralize this litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This litigation currently consists of three actions pending in the Central District of California, the Southern District of Florida, and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, as listed on Schedul...
Views: 0
*1368TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendants Franck’s Lab, Inc., and Franck’s Pharmacy, Inc. (“Franck’s”) move for centralization of this litigation in the Eastern District of Louisiana. This litigation currently consists of 21 actions pending in six districts, as listed on Schedules A and B.1 The actions listed on Schedule A primarily involve injuries allegedly...
Views: 0
Page 112353
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Boyer action move for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania before Judge Cynthia M. Rufe. All responding parties support or do not oppose the motion, to the extent that Judge Rufe has the time and capacity to take on this MDL while als...
Views: 2
TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, common defendant Stericycle, Inc. (Stericycle) moves for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of Illinois. The litigation encompasses four actions, which are listed on Schedule A, pending in the Southern District of California, the Northern District of Illinois (two actions), and the Western District of Pennsylva...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in a Southern District of California action (Saubers) seeks centralization in the Southern District of California of this litigation regarding the alleged mislabeling of certain food products made by defendant Kashi Company (Kashi). This litigation consists of four actions pending in two districts as listed on Schedu...
Views: 1
*1356ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in an action (Winkeler) pending in the Northern District of Florida and an action {Robin) pending in the Eastern District of Louisiana move to centralize this litigation in the Southern District of Mississippi. The litigation encompasses the eighteen actions listed on Schedule A.1 Plaintiffs in the Eastern Dist...
Views: 1
Page 112358
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in one action move to centralize this litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.1 This litigation currently consists of two actions pending in two districts as listed on Schedule A. The actions involve allegedly abusive practices in the unilateral “forced” placement of hazard insurance by HSBC Bank (“HSBC”)...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in one action move to centralize this litigation, which currently consists of three actions pending in three districts as listed on Schedule A, in the Northern District of California.1 The actions involve allegedly abusive practices in the unilateral “forced” placement of hazard insurance by JPMorgan Chase Bank (“Ch...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in the Northern District of Ohio action moves for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings *1374in the Southern District of Mississippi.1 This litigation currently consists of eight actions pending in six districts as listed on Schedule A.2
Plaintiffs in four actions and potential tag-along actions support ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendants National Milk Producers Federation, Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., Land O’Lakes, Inc., Dairy-lea Cooperative, Inc., and Agri-Mark, Inc., move to centralize this litigation in the Northern District of California. The motion encompasses four actions, three consolidated actions in the Northern District of California an...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112362: In re Capatriti Brand Olive Oil Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation
Page 112362
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, common defendant Kangadis Food Inc. d/b/a The Gourmet Factory (Kangadis) moves to centralize this litigation in the Southern District of New York. This litigation currently consists of two actions, as listed on Schedule A, pending in two adjacent districts.1 The eases in this litigation involve allegations that Kangadis misbra...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant McMullen & Drury, P.A.’s (“M & D”) Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 17) and Plaintiff Luciena S. Grant-Fletcher’s Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21). This case involves a claim that, in its efforts to collect a debt arising from outstanding assessments Mrs. Fletcher owed to Barnside Condominium Association, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On January 19, 2010, the Plaintiffs, former employees of Marriott International, Inc. “Marriott” and/or its corporate predecessors, filed a Class Action Complaint against Marriott and Marriott International, Inc. Stock and Cash Incentive Plan in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. ECF No. 1. The Plaintiffs, who received Retired Deferred Stock Bonus ...
Views: 0
Page 112368
MEMORANDUM OPINION
For many employers, conducting a criminal history or credit record background check on a potential employee is a rational and legitimate component of a reasonable hiring process. The reasons for conducting such checks are obvious. Employers have a clear incentive to avoid hiring employees who have a proven tendency to defraud or steal from their employers, engage in workplace...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Document 33), attached exhibits, its memorandum in support (Document 34), Plaintiffs response in opposition (Document 35), attached exhibits, . and Defendant’s Reply (Document 37). After careful consideration of the parties’ written submissions and the entire record, the Court, for the reasons stated here...
Views: 1
ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Transfer to the Western District of Wisconsin (Doc. No. 10). Plaintiff Craig H. Kelling (“Plaintiff’) filed a Memorandum in Opposition (Doc. No. 11) to the Motion. For the following reasons, the Motion is due to be denied. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Currently pending before the Court is Defendant PNC Bank’s (“PNC”) Motion for Summary Judgment. For the following reasons, the Motion is granted in its entirety.
1. FACTUAL BACKGROUND1
A. Plaintiff’s Employment with PNC
On April 30, 2008, Plaintiff, Christian Blackwell-Murray, an African American male, submitted an application (“Application”) for employment with Defendant PNC as a br...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff has filed a motion (Doc. No. 48) to quash subpoena and discovery deposition of her treating psychiatrist. The motion addresses a subpoena and deposition notice issued with regard to Albert Okine, PA-C, by defendants Woodbury County, Iowa, Glenn J. Parrett, Amy Strim, Brigid Delaney, Jornia Schwedler and Dustin De-Groot (the “County defendants”). Plaintiff contends that the physici...
Views: 0
Page 112416
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Gramn Simmonds seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner) denying his application for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI) pursuant to Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3). Simmonds contends the administrative...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [dkt. 24]. The Motion has been fully briefed. The Court finds that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the parties’ papers such that the decision process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Therefore, pursuant to E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(e)(2), it is hereby ...
Views: 0
Page 112424
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFFS’ JUNE 21,2013 EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, AND/OR PERMANENT INJUNtTION
This lawsuit challenges the nutritional adequacy of the meals provided to Michigan Department of Corrections’ prisoners during the Islamic month of Ramadan. Presently before the Court is an “Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Or...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. #48] AND DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
I. Introduction
The Plaintiff, Josephina Dominguez (“Dominguez”), brings this negligence action grounded in premises liability for monetary relief against the Defendant United States of America (“United States”) pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal Exhibits Filed in Support of Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 50.) While it is the plaintiffs’ motion, it appears from the motion that it is in fact the defendants who request that the materials be sealed. (See Doc. 50 at 3.) The Court tentatively concludes that there ...
Views: 0
Page 112456
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
I. Introduction
This is a case based on 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Alabama Code § 6-6-222, and Alabama common law. Ahmad R. Jones (“Plaintiff”) claims that the actions of Nancy T. Buckner (“Buckner”), Alicia J. Fields (“Fields”), and Tyisha Thompson (“Thompson”) (collectively, “Defendants”) resulted in various constitutional, statutory, and state common law injuries...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
:
TORRANCE JONES, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : Civil Action No. 10-2074 (ABJ)...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
FOGO DE CHAO )
CHURRASCARIA, LLC )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises out of a software development and license agreement between plaintiff Superior Edge, Inc. (“SEI”) and defendant Monsanto Company (“Monsanto”). Pursuant to the agreement, SEI was to develop software for Monsanto to assist in Monsanto’s seed sales initiatives. Prior to entering into the agreement with SEI, Monsanto had entered into a separate agreement ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Sidney Reid and Angel Lake, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated (collectively “Plaintiffs”), bring this putative class action against Unilever United States, Inc. (“Unilever”) asserting breaches of express and implied warranties, unjust enrichment, violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. (the “Magnuson-Moss Act”),...
Views: 1
*75
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR NEW TRIAL
In May 2008, the apartment building in which plaintiffs lived was destroyed by fire. Plaintiffs Gayle Gardner, Tanya Puliseiano, Crystal Caissie, and Louise Felteau brought an action for negligence against defendant Simpson Financing Limited Partnership, the entity that owned and operated the apartment co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is an action for gender discrimination in the workplace in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of Í964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151B, § 4. Plaintiff Rebecca Fisher was hired as a full-time firefighter by the Town of Orange, Massachusetts, in October 2007. She alleges that she was discrimin...
Views: 0
Page 112551
*125
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WITH REGARD TO CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Document Nos. 4-8 and 57)
Eli Damon (“Plaintiff’) brought this action asserting certain common law and civil rights claims and seeking a permanent injunction against the Town of Hadley Police Department and certain Hadley police officers (“Defendants”), Dennis Hukowicz (Chief of the Hadley Police Department), Mitchell ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING CITY OF CORINTH’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Presently before the Court is an amended motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion for summary judgment [85] filed by Defendant, City of Corinth.1 Upon due consideration, the Court finds the motion should be granted.
A. Factual and Procedural Background
The Corinth, Missi...
Views: 0
Page 112605
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of Chendra Johnson-Hampton, Wylinda Gregory and Youmeka Simpson (“Movants”) for leave to intervene in this action [5]. The court has considered the motion, the responses, and Movants’ reply brief, and for the reasons stated below, the court finds that all Movants should be allowed to intervene in this action.
This action was filed by the EEOC, alleging unlaw...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
At the trial of this case the jury found defendant Christopher Reese (“Reese”) guilty of: (a) one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344; (b) one count of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344; (c) one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (“Count Three”); and (d) one count of aggravated identity the...
Views: 0
*1054ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants Chung, Newton, and Moore’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on Counts One, Two, Three, Eleven, and Twelve of the Second Amended Complaint (“Defendants’ Motion”) (Doc. Ill), the Response, and the Reply. Defendants’ Motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
I. BACKGROUND
On September 25, 2012, Unisource Worldwide, Inc. (“Plaintiff’), a company...
Views: 1
ORDER The Hutchens defendants, joined by Mr. Luistermans and Mr. Meisels, move for a stay of proceedings in this case pending the resolution by the Tenth Circuit of the appeals from this Court’s class certification order. The Broad defendants respond that they do not oppose the motion except as it applies to them.1 Plaintiffs oppose any stay. For the reasons set forth in this order, the motion for...
Views: 0
Page 112636
Memorandum of Opinion and Order
This is a securities fraud class action brought against Defendant Eaton Corporation (Eaton) and individual defendants who served as senior executives of Eaton at the time of the events alleged, Alexander M. Cutler, Mark M. McGuire, Victor Leo, Donald J. McGrath, and Taras G. Szmagala, Jr. Eaton and the individual defendants who are current Eaton executives (Cutle...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER [Resolving ECF No. 38]
On May 1, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiffs Motion to Reopen and Substitute Michael Buzulencia, Trustee as Plaintiff. See Order (ECF No. 35). On May *85729, 2013, Defendant filed a Rule 59(e) Motion for Reconsideration or, in the Alternative, for Certification and . Stay to File Interlocutory Appeal (ECF No. 38).
After notice to the parties,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding ECF Nos. 38; 40]
This matter is before the Court upon the partial summary judgment and summary judgment motions filed by Plaintiff Teresa McCurdy and Defendant Hanover Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. (“Hanover”), respectively. ECF Nos. 38; 40. The- parties responded (ECF Nos. 42; 43) and Hanover replied (ECF No. 43). For the reasons that follow, the Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiffs Rosemary Quinn and Alan Ducorsky bring this putative class action on behalf of themselves and similarly-situated individuals who purchased from defendant Walgreen Co. (“Walgreens”) certain dietary supplements that claim to “help rebuild cartilage.” Plaintiffs allege these products do not perform as advertised because it is, in fact, impossible to “rebuild cartilag...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in three actions pending in the District of South Carolina move to centralize this litigation in that district. The litigation encompasses the five actions listed on Schedule A.1 All responding plaintiffs support centralization, but there is some disagreement as to an appropriate transferee district. Plaintiff in the...
Views: 0
Opinion
Defendant Orient-Express Hotels Inc. (“OEHI” or the “Defendant”) has moved pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the amended complaint (the “Amended Complaint” or “AC”) of plaintiff Melissa St. Jean (“St. Jean” or the “Plaintiff’), alleging gender discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. ...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
In this case, 52 individual plaintiffs from 16 different states sue a combined 16 defendant banks and loan servicers, each based on a discrete mortgage transaction. Plaintiffs assert 11 causes of action: under (1) the Truth In Lénding Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq.; (2) the Home Ownership Equity Protection Act (“HOEPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1639; (3) the Fair Debt Collection Pr...
Views: 0
*515
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants Molina Healthcare, Inc.’s and Molina Information Systems, Ine.’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs claims of age-based employment discrimination and retaliation. (Doc. 46.) This case concerns Plaintiffs allegations that his previous employer discriminated against him on the basis of his age and retaliated ag...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Teresa Stanek Rea’s and Intervenors SAP America, Inc. and SAP AG’s Motions to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Docs. 16, 39.) This case concerns the claims of Versata Development Group, Inc., by virtue of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”),...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND MOTION TO STRIKE, AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Tony Clancy (“Clancy”), on behalf of himself and a proposed class of similarly situated individuals, has filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against Defendants Bromley Tea Company, Eastern Tea Corp., London...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
World Class Technology Corporation (‘WCT”) seeks declaratory judgment of noninfringement of five patents owned by Ormco Corporation (“Ormco”). Ormco asserts a counterclaim of infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 8,393,896 (“the '896 Patent”), a sixth patent now the subject of this litigation. Relevant to the present motion, Ormco accuses WCT of marketing an infring...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in one action move to centralize this litigation in the Southern District of Illinois or, alternatively, in the Northern District of California, and request separation and remand of claims concerning unrelated insurance products and one insurer defendant.1 This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in...
Views: 0
Page 112733
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS
In this securities fraud suit, Defendants Hewlett Packard Co. and its former CEO, Mark Hurd, move to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4. Because the First Amended Complaint fails to satisfy the materiality and falsity requirements for a securities fraud claim, the Court will gra...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE BASED ON THE GOVERNMENT’S WARRANT-LESS USE OF REALr-TIME CELL PHONE LOCATION INFORMATION (Doc. 38) This matter came before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence Based on the Government’s Warrantless Use of Real-Time Cell Phone Location Information. (Doc. 38). Defendant contends that the government’s warrantless search...
Views: 0
Page 112766
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Debtor-Appellant, D. Erik von Kiel, appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Court’s order dated June 19, 2012. Having considered fully the briefs and the record on appeal, and having determined that oral argument is not necessary in this case,1 the Court will affirm the order of the Bankruptcy Court for the following reasons.
I. BACKGROUND
On May 6, 2010, Debtor filed a voluntary ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Federal National Mortgage Association’s (“FNMA” or “Fannie Mae”) MOTION TO REMAND (Docket No. 4). For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be granted.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On July 30, 2012, OneWest Bank, FSB (“OneWest”) foreclosed on property mortgaged by Michael and Michelle Davis (collectively, the “Davises”). ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs Charles and Cheryl Alimena sue defendants Citimortgage, Inc. (“Citimortgage”) and C.R. Title Services, Inc. (“C.R. Title,” and together with Citimortgage, the “Citi Defendants”) and defendants Vericrest Financial, Inc. (“Vericrest”), Lone Star U.S. Acquisitions, LLC (“Lone Star”), and LSF7 NPL VI Trust (“Trust,” and together with Vericrest and Lone Star, the “Vericrest Defendan...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS GAY & ROBINSON, INC. AND ROBINSON FAMILY PARTNERS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(B)(6); AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS GAY & ROBINSON, INC., ROBINSON FAMILY PARTNERS, AND PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
On Febru...
Views: 0
Page 112866
*920
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Panoramic Stock Images, Ltd. (“Panoramic”) is an Illinois business that licenses photographs to publishers, including Defendant The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (“McGraw-Hill”), an education publisher. For several years, the parties operated under an agreement that permitted McGraw-Hill to make limited use of photographs in which Panoramic claims to ho...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff David Gelber brings this putative class action against Defendants Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc. (together, “Toyota”) on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, who purchased or leased a model year 2004-2009 Toyota Prius (“Gen II Prius”) vehicle in California. Mr. Gelber alleges...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiff Maria del Carmen Taboas’ (“Taboas”) motion not to allow Pedro J. Manzano-Yates, defendant Fiddler, Gonzalez & Rodriguez, PSC’s (“FGR”) Managing Director, to take plaintiff Taboas’ deposition. (Docket No. 19.) After reviewing the plaintiffs motion, id., and defendant’s memorandum of law in support of allowing Mr. Manzano-Yates to take plaintiffs d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The instant action involves a plan administrator’s termination of long-term disability benefits previously paid to a plan participant over the course of ten years. Before the Court for disposition are the Defendant’s MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 18), the Defendant’s Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 19), the Defendant’s Concise Statement of Materi...
Views: 0
Page 112956
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION In this employee-benefits case, Plaintiff Jonathan W. Dubee (“Plaintiff’) claims that Defendants Donald Scammell (“Scammell”), Don Scammell, Inc. (“the Company”), and the Don Scammell Inc. Employee Stock Accumulation and Retention Plan (“the Plan”) (collectively, “Defendants”) violated the terms of the Plan by not allocating Plaintiff sufficient shar...
Views: 0
Page 112987
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Janet Mavis Marcusse, :
:
Plaintiff, :
v. : Civil Action No. 12-1025 (CKK)
:
United States Department :
...
Views: 0
Page 112988
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Background At the conclusion of the presentation of evidence in the second trial of this case, the defendants made a timely motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R.Civ.P. 50. The motion was primarily based on the argument that the defendants were immune under the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”), 47 U.S.C. § 230. The Court denied the motion for the same reasons...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS THIS MATTER comes before the Court following a hearing, held on July 12, 2013, regarding the Court’s Order to Show Cause on the Matter of Sanctions (Doc. 259), issued on May 13, 2013. In that order, the Court required Plaintiff, Julian Moreno, and Defendants, Taos County Board of Commissioners, Deputy Carlos Archuleta, and Deputy Paul Garcia, to sh...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants Jose Guadalupe Lara and Efrain Mejia-Ruiz’s1 objections [130] to Magistrate Judge Walker’s Report and Recommendation (the “R & R”) [128], which recommends that Defendants’ motions to suppress the wiretap evidence [108-112] be denied.
I. Defendants Who Have Pled Guilty
Following the filing of the R & R, Defendants Markus Galvan, Andres Gutierre...
Views: 0
OPINION
I.
Introduction
The advent of electronic mail has brought with it a flood of commercial advertising, some of it misleading, false, or deceptive, some even fraudulent, much of it unwanted. That in turn has given rise to federal and state legal initiatives intended to stem the flow of the unwanted, and especially the misleading, false, deceptive, and fraudulent e-mails, so-called anti-s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND
On March 18, 2013, Plaintiffs Nancy and David Olson (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The Complaint alleges only state law claims. On April 24, 2013, Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) and Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America,” and collectively with Wells Fargo, “Bank Defendants”) removed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On July 19, 2012, the Plaintiff David Annunziato (the “Plaintiff’) filed a complaint seeking redress for the alleged illegal practices of the Defendant Collecto, Inc. d/b/a EOS CCA (the “Defendant”) in connection with the collection of a debt allegedly owned by the Plaintiff in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (“FDCPA”...
Views: 0
Page 113074
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The presently incarcerated petitioner Thomas F. Green brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on the grounds (1) that he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel and (2) prosecutorial misconduct. The Court finds that the Petitioner has established that he re*242ceived constitutionally inadequate a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs1 — six institutional Funds that invested in debt securities issued by Diagnostic Ventures, Inc. (DVI, Inc.)2 — sue for violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5. They also seek imposition of liability under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78t(a); Section 18 of the Exchange Act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Pending before the Court are the MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 41) filed by Defendant Jameson Health Systems (“Jameson” or “Hospital”) and the MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 46) filed by Defendants Lawrence County Children and Youth Services (“LCCYS”) and caseworker Eva Lightel (“Lightel”), with briefs in support. Plaintiff Eileen Bower (“Bower...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING GRAND TRUNK’S RENEWED MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR NEW TRIAL OR REMITTITUR [229]
This case’s central issue has been whether Plaintiffs Consolidated Rail Cor*724poration and Norfolk Southern Railroad Company (“Plaintiffs” or “Conrail”) had the right to use Defendant Grand Trunk’s tracks to cross a property either called “Trenton Steel Warehouse...
Views: 0
Page 113121
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [54] Before the Court is Defendants Rick Snyder, Kirk T. Steudle, Victor Judnic, and Mark Steucher’s motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs BBF Engineering Services, PC, and Bellandra Foster’s first amended complaint. Plaintiffs allege that the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), through Judnic and Steucher, discrimi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RONALD W. HODGES,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1675 (JDB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Ronald Hodges brings this action against...
Views: 0
Page 113141
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On June 10, 2013, a Decision and Order was entered permitting plaintiffs to make a proffer of evidence that would establish the second prong of the only remaining cause of action against the defendant Michael S. Banks (“Banks” or “defendant”),1 piercing the corporate veil. Plaintiffs made such proffer and defendant responded. This matter was taken on...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Howard Wayne Eddins, brings *846this action against Cenlar FSB (“Cenlar”)1 for allegedly furnishing inaccurate information about Eddins to consumer'reporting agencies, which negatively affected his credit scóre. Specifically, Eddins poses the following six claims against Cenlar: Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. (“FCRA”)...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In this suit, Plaintiff Mark McCombs (“McCombs”) alleges discrimination by his former employer, Defendant Federal Express Corporation (“FedEx”), on the basis of age and perceived disability. McCombs claims that FedEx denied him the opportunity to participate in job-related training due to his age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). Further, he all...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (“BMS”) brings this breach of contract action against defendant Matrix Laboratories Limited (“Matrix”). Matrix moves to dismiss the Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6), arguing that this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Matrix and that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim for breach of...
Views: 1
ORDER: 1) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; 2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND 3) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS’MOTION TO STRIKE
On July 24, 2013, the Court heard Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding the Remaining Claim of-Plain1 tiffs Lori Kahre and Lee Belcher (doc. #...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending are defendant Marcus Wyn Taylor’s motion to suppress evidence, filed December 13, 2012, supplemental motion to suppress evidence, filed December 27, 2012, and second supplemental motion to suppress evidence, filed January 14, 2013.
I.
The discussion that follows assumes a familiarity with the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the May 14, 2...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION 556
*554II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................557
III. APPLICABLE LAW.....................................................563
A. Monell Liability.....................................................563
B. Stops, Frisks, and Searches Under the Fourth Amendment..............565
1. The Definition of a Stop...............................
Views: 0
Page 113303
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A (“Shady Grove”) brings this class action against defendant Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”), seeking payment of statutory interest penalties mandated by the New York State Insurance Law and accompanying regulations. By this motion, Shady Grove seeks certification of the following class, pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3) of the Fede...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 04-128-08 (RMC)
)
JAMES D. HILL, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Commissioners of Bristol County, Massachusetts (“plaintiff’) brings this action against the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), together referred to as “the Enterprises”, and the Federal Housing and Finance Agency (“the Agency”). Plaintiff seeks to collect real estate transfer taxes that it ...
Views: 0
*627
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Plaintiff, Philip Gibson’s, Petition for Habeas Corpus. (R. Doc. 1.) For the following reasons, the Court must abstain from exercising jurisdiction over Plaintiffs Writ of Habeas Corpus. Accordingly, it is ordered that Philip Gibson’s claims brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 against Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. Because this Court lacks j...
Views: 0
Page 113434
*1071 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Darryl Calhoun (“Calhoun”) seeks judicial review, pursuant to Social Security Act (“Act”) §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3),2 of the final decision of Acting Commissioner of Social Security Carolyn Colvin (“Commissioner”) denying Calhoun’s claim for supplemental security income (“SSI”) disability benefits. Calhoun has moved alternatively for summary judgment under Rule ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
FirstMerit Bank, N.A. (“FirstMerit”) has sued Trinity Management Associates, L.P. (“Trinity”), Carsten Frank II (“Frank”), S. Thomas Clements (“Clements”), Daniel Kinnare (“Kinnare”) and William Sivers (“Sivers”), alleging a breach of contract on the part of each defendant. All of those contract claims stem from the identical promissory note (“Note”) on which Trinit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff Erica P. Smith (“Smith” or “Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendant Walgreen Co. (‘Walgreens” or “Defendant”), alleging employment discrimination based on race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”) and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“Section 1981”). Presently pending before the Court is Defendant’s ...
Views: 0
Page 113467
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff A.M., a student diagnosed with intellectual1 and learning disabilities, brings this action by her parent, Y.N., pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., challenging the education program offered by the New York City Department of Education (“DOE”). A.M. asks this Court to vacate the decision and order of a New Y...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS; AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND FOR SANCTIONS
(Docket Nos. 57, 63, 65, 67, 72, 100)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff in this matter brings suit against á variety of defendants alleging various causes of action that appear to largely stem from her unsuccessful application for employment with the San Francisco Human Rights Commission....
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Before the Court is the Plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”), which the Court is treating as a motion for a preliminary injunction, ECF No. 2. The Court has reviewed the motion and supporting declaration, the response and supporting declarations, the supplemental memorandum and supporti...
Views: 0
ORDER
ARENDA L. WRIGHT ALLEN,
On January 9, 2013, Plaintiff ElcomSoft, Ltd. (“ElcomSoft”) brought this suit against Defendants Passcovery Co., Ltd. (“Passcovery”), Aecentsoft, Denis Gladysh,1 and Ivan Golubev, alleging that Defendants had infringed its patents in violation of federal law. ElcomSoft also asserts claims of unjust enrichment and breach of contract under common law doctrines.
On Ma...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL OR NEW TRIAL
Before the Court are motions by four defendants for judgment of acquittal or new trials. The government has responded and the motions are fully briefed. The Court has reviewed the submissions of the parties and finds that the relevant law and facts have been set forth in the motion ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
UNITED STATES, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1354 (RM...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The above referenced action alleges that Defendant Parker-Hannifin Corporation (“Parker”) improperly designed, manufactured, marketed, and serviced defective industrial oil seals sold to Plaintiff Omni USA, Inc. (“Omni”) specifically for use in its gearboxes,, sold as part of agricultural irrigation systems to a third party. The Court’s Opinion and Order of March 27, 2012, 201...
Views: 0
Page 113797
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiff Rojeanna Josephine Lopez seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner) denying her application for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI) pursuant to Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3). Lopez contends the adminis...
Views: 0
Page 113872
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
WALTER E. CAMPBELL COMPANY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, Donald J. Huddleston, who is proceeding pro se, asserts claims against his former employer, defendant Sunshine Mills, Inc., for race discrimination pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), and for retaliation and failure to pay overtime pay pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”), 29...
Views: 0
*252
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff-relator Lawrence Klein (“Klein”) filed this qui tam action against Empire Education Corporation (“Empire” or “defendant”) and Does 1-50 pursuant to the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-33; the Massachusetts False Claims Act, Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 12, Section 5A et seq.; and the New York False Claims Ac...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
After review of the motion papers, other relevant docket papers, the Report and Recommendation, the objection thereto, and the reply to the objection, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation for the reasons set forth by the Magistrate Judge. The motion of the defendants David Angueira and Swartz & Swartz, P.C. for judgment on the pleadings (dkt. no. 88) is...
Views: 0
Page 114251
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs N.K. and L.W., individually and on behalf of their minor child J.K., bring this action against the New York City Department of Education (“DOE”) pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794; and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law, N.Y.. Educ....
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Bank of America, N.A. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Verified and Sworn Complaint (Doc. # 59) filed on February 1, 2018. Also before the Court is defendant Fannie Mae’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Verified & Sworn Complaint filed on February 21, 20...
Views: 0
ORDER
The captioned case is before the court on appeal from the following two orders of the bankruptcy court: 1) finding appellant in contempt of the automatic stay; and 2) awarding $2,500 in attorney’s fees as actual damages to appellees. Appellant has also filed a motion to stay the appeal and to remand to the bankruptcy court for further proceedings [5].
I. Factual Background
Appellant was h...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CASE
This matter comes before the court on the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge. Dkt. 50. The court has reviewed the relevant documents, including plaintiffs objections (Dkt. 53) and the remaining record.
On June 19, 2013, U.S. Magistrate Judge Karen L. Strombom issued a Report and Recommendation, concluding that (1) plainti...
Views: 0
RULING This is a desegregation action originally brought in 1966 by parents of black students attending school in Ouachita Parish, Louisiana. On January 30, 1970, the Court issued a desegregation decree, under which the Ouachita Parish School Board (“the School Board”) has operated, with modification and amendment, for more than forty years. Pending before the Court is a Motion for Declaration o...
Views: 0
Page 114435
OPINION
Plaintiff, Kandise Schnoor, sued Defendant, Walgreen Income Protection Plan for Pharmacists and Registered Nurses, under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 el seq., alleging that Defendant improperly denied her short-term and long-term disability benefits. The parties have filed cross motions for judgment on the administrative record (docket no...
Views: 0
Page 114438
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this breach-of-contract action filed by Dennis Brennan (“Plaintiff’) against The Roman Catholic Diocese of Syracuse New York, Inc. (“Defendant”), are Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 112), and Plaintiffs motion for leave to file a Third Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 115). For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s mot...
Views: 0
Page 114450
ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS; (2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO AMEND
On July 22, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants SDC Montana Bakken Exploration, LLC, Val Verde Investments, LLC, and Ringo Shapiro (collectively, “Defendants”). (Doc. # 16.) Amy Davis, Esq., and Corey Wehmeyer, Esq., appeared on behalf...
Views: 0
Page 114458
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
LANDMARK LEGAL FOUNDATION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC (“HPL”), filed suit against Defendants, The New York Times Company (“NYT”); G4 Media, LLC (“G4”); CBS Corporation (“CBS”); Bravo Media, LLC (“Bravo”); and J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. (“J.C. Penney”), alleging claims of patent infringement. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the issue of patent exhaust...
Views: 1
Page 114585
OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT
The matter before the Court is an appeal from a bankruptcy court decision. The appeal concerns the attorney-fee agreement that the debtor, Robert Gour-*858lay, signed with Fregó & Associates (“Fre-gó”) before he filed for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court determined that the pre-petition fee agreement was a dischargeable debt under...
Views: 0
*1078
ORDER RE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Guthy-Renker, LLC and Guthy-Renker Partners, Inc. (collectively “Guthy-Renker”) on May 10, 2013.1 Plaintiff Lisa Blake opposed the motion on June 11, 2013, and Defendants replied on July 10, 2013.2 Neither party requested oral argument and this Court has determined that it was not ne...
Views: 0
ORDER
On March 27, 2012, plaintiff Anand Dasrath (“plaintiff’) commenced this action against his former employer, Stony Brook University Medical Center (the “Medical Center”), alleging that he was discriminated against upon the basis of his national origin and race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”). [Docket Entry No. I].1 On July...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
MONIQUE AUCOIN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND
A. Procedural History
On September 17, 2009, Roland and Celeste Hamilton, parents of a minor1 son, K.H., filed the instant action. ECF No. 1. Because the undersigned writes only for the parties, and the matter is before the court via a thorough report and recommendation from Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson, and his suggested disposition will be adopted, although on a m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS (Dkt. Nos. 21 & 30)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Sexual Minorities Uganda is an umbrella organization located in Kampala, Uganda, comprising member organizations that advocate for the fair and equal treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) people in that east African country. Defendant Scott Lively is an Amer...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are the following motions: Defendant Foshee & Yaffe Law Firm’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint [Doc. No. Ill]; Defendants Betsy Ann Brown and Law Offices of Brown & Cullimore’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 112]; and Defendant Yancy Redcorn’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 113].1 The Motions seek dismissal of the Am...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are the motions for summary judgment of Monitronics International, Inc. (“Monitronics”) and UTC First and Security Americas Corp., Inc. (“UTC”). (Dkt. Nos. 93, 95). For the reasons that follow, the Court DENIES the motions.
I.
The plaintiff, Diana Mey (“Mey”) claims that Versatile Marketing Solutions, Inc. (‘VMS”), acting on behalf of Monitr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This civil action is before the court for consideration of “Defendant Franklin Collection Service, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to All Claims” [doc. 12], Plaintiff has filed a response [doc. 25], and defendant has submitted a reply [doc. 19] and a supplemental reply [doc. 26].1 Oral argument is unnecessary, and the motion is ripe for the court’s determination.
Plaint...
Views: 0
Page 114901
ORDER Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation (# 35) on July 1, 2013, in which he recommends this Court deny Defendant’s Motion (# 20) for Summary Judgment, grant Plaintiffs Cross-motion (# 24) for Summary Judgment, and order Defendant to provide to Plaintiff an unredacted copy of the “Notes” (ia, the three pages of notes from a telephone interview conducted on March 13,...
Views: 0
ORDER
On September 8, 2011, plaintiff Betty F. Brown Greene (“plaintiff’) commenced this action against the Brentwood Union Free School District (the “District”), the Board of Education of the District (the “Board”), Board members George Talley, Lorraine Pace, Stephen Coleman, and *138Ronald Jimenez, Superintendent Donna Jones, and Assistant Superintendent Joan Lange (collectively, “defendants”...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Abdelgadir Aboeid (“Mr. Aboeid”), his wife Mona Abdelgadir (“Mrs. Abdelgadir”), and Mr. Aboeid on behalf of their seven minor children (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “the Aboeid family”) commenced this action against Saudi Arabian Airlines Corporation (“Defendant” or “Saudi Airlines”). This action arises from a series of events beginning with Defendant’s ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons,1 other than Defendants, who acquired the common stock of a start-up company, Primo Water Corporation (“Primo” or “the company”), between November 4, 2010, and November 10, 2011 (the *533“Class Period”), including the company’s initial public offering on November 4, 2010 (the “I...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Krisber and Mario Castro (“Plaintiffs” or the “Castros”) commenced this action against Defendants Green Tree Servicing LLC (“Green Tree”) and Kevin Smith (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (“FDCPA”), and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227. (“TCPA”). Amended Complai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Robert Dali brings the above-captioned action against Defendant St. Catherine of Siena Medical Center (“Medical Center”), asserting claims of gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), and the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290 et seq. (...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the motion for conditional certification and court-authorized notices pursuant to section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) filed by plaintiffs Moisés Perez (“plaintiff Perez”) and Alejandro Velez-Cespon (“plaintiff Velez”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”), (Docket No. 34). Having considered the arguments in the plaintiffs’ motion, the response in op...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this civil action for copyright infringement, plaintiff Michael Kienitz alleges that defendants Sconnie Nation LLC and Underground Printing-Wisconsin, LLC infringed his copyright in the Official Portrait of Mayor Paul Soglin by using the photograph on t-shirts and tank tops manufactured, promoted and sold in connection with the 2012 Mifflin Street Block Party in Madison, Wisc...
Views: 0
Page 115175
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
QUALITY AUTOMOTIVE
SERVICES, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1503 (ESH)
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION,
Defendant.
...
Views: 0
Page 115184
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action Nos. 11-443, 11-444, 11-445
v. (BAH)
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs “Motion for a Protective Order to Limit *231Opt-in Depositions and Defendants’ Discovery Demands of the Opt-Ins.” [Doe. No. 186]. The issue to be addressed is the scope of permissible discovery in this conditionally certified collective action. The Court received defendants’ response [Doe. No. 192], plaintiffs’ reply [Do...
Views: 0
Page 115193
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Mary Jane Gretzula brings claims for, inter alia, violation of Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and for intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”) against Defendants Albert Monillas, her former supervisor, and the Camden County Technical Schools Board of Education (“the Board”), her former employer. This matter comes be...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are Motions for Summary Judgment brought by four groups of defendants referred to in this opinion as the Federal Defendants, the Camden City Defendants, the Camden County Defendants, and the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office Defendants (collectively, “Defendants”). This suit arises out of events that occurred primarily on the morning of January 8, 2008, when deputized mem...
Views: 0
ORDER
This Civil Contempt Order involves Juror Steven Phillip Freed, Juror Number 02-0084. The Court summoned Mr. Freed by standard juror summons. Mr. Freed appeared as part of the jury venire, responded to questions from the Court and counsel for the parties and was ultimately selected to sit as one of two alternate jurors for an estimated three week trial. When the Court instructed the jurors...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff Parker Avenue, L.P., a real estate developer, has sued defendants City of Philadelphia (the “City”) and the Philadelphia City Council (“City Council”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of its constitutional rights to Equal Protection, Procedural Due Process, and Substantive Due Process for defendants’ failure to pave a street. Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief, monetary ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL ON COUNT 7 OF THE THIRD SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
This matter is before the Court on defendant Edward Schneider’s post-trial *1038motion for judgment of acquittal on count seven of the third superseding indictment. The indictment charged Schneider in three counts: (1) conspiracy to defraud Fifth Third Bank (count one); (2) corruptly giving...
Views: 0
Page 115347
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KARIN WENG,
Plaintiff
Civil Action No. 10-cv-2051 (BJR)
v.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is currently before the court on Defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 9.)1 In their Complaint, plaintiffs Karatia Pickens and Fredrick Pickens (the “Pickens”) assert a claim for breach of contract against defendant Lib*1267erty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty”),2 alleging that it breached their insurance contract when it...
Views: 0
*1171MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On January 19, 2011, Angel Dillard wrote a letter to Dr. Mila Means, who had publicly announced plans to open an abortion services clinic in Wichita, Kansas. Most of the letter centers on arguments from Scripture, appeals to conscience, and the practical disadvantages and difficulties associated with such a clinic. But in the body of the letter, Dillard also wrote that “Y...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an employment discrimination case. Plaintiff Troy Schummer was terminated by Defendant Black Bear Distribution, LLC (“Black Bear”). Schummer brings claims against Black Bear and Defendant Jim Gross under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”). Presently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.1 (Dkt. No...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
JAMES A. FROST )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil No. 12-1460
)
CATHOLIC UNI...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SIEMENS USA HOLDINGS, INC. )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-977
...
Views: 0
Page 115396
ORDER
Before the Court are plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and defendants’ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. The, master has been fully briefed. Based upon the parties’ submissions, the Court makes its determination.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2010, the Oklahoma House of Representatives voted to approve House Joint Resolution 1056 (“HJR 1056”), and the Oklahoma Senate followed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently pending in this case arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) is the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant the United States of America (“the Government”). (ECF No. 66). The issues are fully briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing being deemed necessary. See Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be denied.
I. Background...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
LISA PARKER )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 115479
Memorandum Opinion
This matter is before the court on two motions to dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint: a motion to dismiss filed by defendants Cindy Casey, John *737Freeman, Lori Green, and Kathy Ralston (“Defendants”), and a motion to dismiss filed by defendant Viola Vaughan-Eden (“Vaughan-Eden”). Plaintiff filed an opposition to both, and Defendants and Vaughan-Eden filed replies. ...
Views: 0
Page 115503
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On the eve of trial, the parties have presented the court with two substantive motions for resolution. The first is a Motion to Intervene [# 122] brought by Praetorian Insurance Company (“Praetorian”). The second is a Partial Motion to Dismiss [# 132] by Defendant James Casey.
In brief, Plaintiffs Christopher Morra and Tracy Morra initiated this action to recover damages fr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
A decade ago, I issued a series of opinions regarding the scope of a litigant’s duty to preserve electronic documents and the consequences of a failure to preserve such documents falling within the scope of that duty.1 At its simplest, that duty requires a party anticipating litigation to refrain from deleting electronically stored information (“ESI”) that may be relevant to t...
Views: 0
ORDER Pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 48(a), the United States has requested leave to dismiss the Indictment against Stephanie Theresa Reyes (Doc. 10). Leave of Court is GRANTED and the original Indictment is DISMISSED against Stephanie Theresa Reyes. Further, the original Indictment and supporting documentation (Docs. 1-7) are hereby STRICKEN and shall be EXPUNGED. The warrant for Stephanie Theresa R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is Defendant Town of Brookhaven’s (“Defendant” or “Town”) motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND1
A. Factual Background
Pro se Plaintiff Darían Trent, Sr. (“Plaintiff’) commenced this action against Defendant alleging that he was discriminated against in violation of Title VII of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
On July 31, 2003, this Court awarded plaintiff Motorola Credit Corporation (“Motorola”) damages in the amount of $2,132,896,906 against defendants Kemal Uzan, Murat Hakan Uzan, Cem Cengiz Uzan, Melahat Uzan, Aysegul Akay, and Antonio Luna Betancourt (the “Uzans”), based on the Uzans’ diversion of large loans made by plaintiffs to Telsim, a Turkish telecommunications company own...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Branhaven, LLC (“Branhaven”) sued BeefTek, Inc. (“BeefTek”), BT Selection, LLC (“BTS”), and PrimeBeefMarker, LLC (“PML”) (collectively the “defendants”) 1 for declaratory judgment and an injunction. The defendants counterclaimed, joining Scidera, Inc. (“Scidera”) as a counterdefendant, for declaratory judgment and specific performance. Pending are Branhaven’s and the defendants...
Views: 0
(Lead Consolidated Case) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the following seven motions to transfer venue to the Northern District of California (“N.D. of California”): Defendant Distinctive Development Ltd.’s Motion to Transfer Venue (6:12-CV-462, Dkt. No. 19); Defendant Electronic .Arts Inc.’s Motion to Transfer Venue to the N.D. of California (6:12-CV-463, Dkt No. 18); Defendant...
Views: 0
Page 115791
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises out of a decade-long business relationship in which Defendant Michael Hynes (“Hynes”) provided business consulting services to Plaintiffs Sacramento E.D.M., Inc. (“SAC EDM”) and SAC EDM’s President, Dan Folk (“Folk”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, against Hynes and ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS; DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
[Re: Docket No. 23]
Presently before the court in this age discrimination and wrongful termination action is Defendant BT Americas Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Dismiss, or in the alternative, Stay Proceedings. Dkt. No. 23. The *1172court found this matter...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case went to trial before a jury on the claims of Latrice Reed against World Security Bureau, Inc. (WSB), Ibrihim Kiswani, and Glendon Groves for race discrimination and retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.1 The jury found in favor of Reed against WSB and Groves on her claim of a racially hostile work environment but in favor of Kiswani on that claim, and it fou...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
UNITED STATES TELESIS, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 115931
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SAMUEL ORTIZ-DIAZ )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs, P.G. and D.G. (“the Parents”), individually and on behalf of their minor child, J.G., bring this action pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act against Defendant New York City Department of Education (“DOE”). Plaintiffs seek review of the April 6, 2012 administrative decision of State Review Officer (“SRO”) Justyn P. Bates, which concluded that th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Karen Gentle, a former employee of defendant, Kohler Company (“Kohler”), seeks short- and long-term disability benefits through Kohler’s employee benefits plan.1 Plaintiff asserts claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.2 This action is before the court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary jud...
Views: 0
ORDER On August 6, 2013, the Court filed under seal an order pertaining to the disgorgement of Manley Toys, Ltd.’s profits and provided the parties with an oppor*1013tunity to propose redactions to that Order. Aviva indicated that it does not believe any redactions are necessary; Manley proposed redaction of the sales and profit information contained within the Order. “There is a common-law right ...
Views: 0
*1359TRANSFER ORDER Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, patentholder MyKey Technology, Inc. (MyKey) moves for centralization of this patent infringement litigation in the Central District of California. This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in the Central District of California, the Western District of Washington, and the Eastern District of Wisconsin, as listed on ...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116035: Pediatric Medical Devices, Inc. v. Indiana Mills & Manufacturing, Inc.
Page 116035
ORDER
TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, SR., District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the May 24, 2013 motion [49] of Plaintiff Pediatric Medical Devices, Inc. (PMD) for partial reconsideration of the Court’s April 26, 2013 claim-construction order [47], 2013 WL 2395994, which construed ten disputed claim terms of the patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 7,281,285 (“the '285 patent”). PMD challenges the C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant PHC-Las Cruces, Inc.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs Claim Under the Rehabilitation Act and Memorandum in Support, filed September 20, 2012 (Doc. 41)(“Motion for Summary Judgment”). The Court held a hearing on November 28, 2012. The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiff Bilye Nordwall’s cause of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this bankruptcy appeal, appellant Webster Capital Finance, Inc. f/k/a Center Capital Corporation (“Webster Capital”) seeks review of various orders issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Kansas. Webster Capital challenges the bankruptcy court’s order denying its untimely objection to confirmation, confirming the debtor’s Chapter 11 Small Business ...
Views: 0
SENTENCING OPINION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) DISCUSSING THE DRAMATIC NATIONAL DISPARITY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE’S APPLICATION OF 21 U.S.C. § 851 ENHANCEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION — DEFENDANT DOUGLAS YOUNG......................883
II. THE OVERVIEW...................................... LO CO 00
A. How The § 851 Enhancement Works................. lO 0...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment ask the Court to decide whether Illinois’ Commercial Safety Towing Law (Towing Law), 625 ILCS 5/18d-101, et seq. is preempted in whole or in part by the Federal Aviation Administration Act of 1994 (FAAAA), as amended by the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act, 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c), because the it has “the force and effe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...............................................................266
FACTUAL BACKGROUND......................................................266
STANDARD OF REVIEW.......................................................267
DISCUSSION..................................................................267
Fraud on the Court — Third Cause of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a product liability action involving the Bumbo Baby Seat, an infant seat manufactured by Defendant Bumbo International Trust. Plaintiffs Leanne and Joseph O’Neal brought this action after then-daughter sustained injuries from falling out of a Bumbo Seat placed on a kitchen countertop. Bumbo now moves for summary judgment on the related grounds that it (1) adequately...
Views: 0
ORDER
On June 29, 2012, plaintiff Jonathan Landow (“plaintiff’) commenced this action against defendants Wachovia Securities, LLC (“Wachovia”), Wells Fargo Ad-visors, LLC (“Wells Fargo”), Robert William Eddy (“Eddy”), George M. Gordon III (“Gordon”), Walter R. Anderson (“Anderson”) and Walter Randolph *111Anderson, Jr. (“Anderson Jr”)1, asserting claims, inter alia, seeking damages for fraud, bre...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On December 16, 2009, Plaintiff Ratna Prabhakar, acting pro se, filed her complaint alleging that Defendant Life Insurance Company of America (“LINA”) had violated the terms of the Group Long Term Disability Income Policy (the “Policy”) issued to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”). (Dkt. No. 45 (“Joint Pre-Trial Order”), at 4.) The alleged violation...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________________
)
ABDUL LOVE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. ) Civil Action No. ...
Views: 0
Page 116156
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE )
INSURANCE COMPANY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________________
)
JOHN HERNDON, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 1...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION
Susan Havens racked up more than $11,000 in credit card debt, and when she didn’t pay her bill, the debt was sold by the credit card company to an out of state debt collector who then attempted to collect the debt. Havens purports to represent a group of similarly situated people in this putative class action brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the crux of wh...
Views: 0
Opinion and Order
Now before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Stay Proceedings [DE 38]. In response, Plaintiff Tonn and Blank Construction, LLC (“T & B”) filed its brief [DE 41], and the Defendants filed their reply [DE 42]. In addition to this briefing, Defendants filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority [DE 44], to which T & B responded [DE 45]. For the following reasons, the Court grants D...
Views: 0
ORDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...............................................................956
PROCEDURAL HISTORY......................................................956
RELEVANT FACTS ............................................................957
ANALYSIS.....................................................................959
I. The Motion To Exclude Dr. Brusso’s Opinions...............
Views: 0
Page 116202
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________________
)
SHIRLEAN BESHIR, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. No....
Views: 0
Page 116209
*1026ORDER Bullying is an extremely serious problem in our country, and it has grown in both scope and visibility in recent years. With the advent of social networking sites, bullied children often find themselves without the benefit of a safe harbor. Not only must they be on guard at school, but also now at home, where there are digital portals — computer, tablet, and phone — to yet more ridicule...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :
: Civil Action No.: 13-265 (RC)
v. :
: Re Document No.: ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs Geordany J. Salomon and Donielle Lewis, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, and Dwight Edghill and Shanroy Powell, individually (collectively “Plaintiffs”) move for leave to file a Proposed Amended Complaint (“PAC”) in this action, adding American Communications Industries, Inc. (“ACI”), Lawrence Presser, Joseph Misseri, and Vincent C...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Darryl Collins, proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. The Commissioner has moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Proc...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PARTIES’ CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff John H. Ray, III alleges that defendant Ropes & Gray LLP (Ropes) denied him promotion to a partnership in the law firm because of his African-American heritage and then retaliated against him when he complained of discrimination. Ray seeks damages against Ropes, several partners of the firm, and Joy Curtis, the firm’s head of human re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff alleges in its Amended Complaint that a provision of an Act Establishing Expanded Gaming in the Commonwealth, 2011 Mass. Acts ch. 194 (“the Gaming Act”), unconstitutionally prevents it from competing for a commercial gaming license in southeastern Massachusetts. More than one year after the original Complaint was filed, defendant Massachusetts Gaming Commission (“the ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Defendant NPL Construction Co.’s Motion for Summary Judgment Seeking Dismissal of All Claims Asserted by Plaintiff Ivan Madrigal Based Upon his General Release of Claims (Doc. # 170), filed on February 9, 2013. Plaintiff Ivan Madrigal filed an Opposition (Doc. # 187/# 188) on March 11, 2013. Defendant filed a Reply (Doc. # 225) on April 6, 2013.
I. BACKGROUND...
Views: 1
Order
This matter comes before the Court without a hearing on the Motion to Quash Subpoenas (Doe. 163) filed by the Defendant, Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation (“Novartis”), the response in opposition (Doc. 178) filed by the Plaintiffs, and the reply (Doc. 182) filed by Novartis.
On July 18, 2013, the Plaintiffs served subpoenas for trial testimony of two Novartis employees, Diane Young and Jo...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (Dkt. 8) and Defendant’s Response in Opposition (Dkt. 11). The Court, having reviewed the motion, response, and being otherwise advised in the premises, concludes that the motion should be granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Ernest Albritton originally filed this action on or about December 13, 2012, in the Circuit Court of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING MOTION TO SUPPRESS
Defendant filed his Motion to Suppress (Dkt. No. 258) on April 13, 2012. The court heard three days of evidence on the Motion to Suppress on November 8, 14, and 28, 2012, and oral argument on April 18, 2013. The parties filed lengthy post-hearing briefs on the Motion to Suppress, including supplementa...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER DIRECTING A HEARING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS AND TO DISMISS INDICTMENT
Wilfredo Santiago is charged with one count of reckless assault in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(6), and two counts of making false statements in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2). The assault charge stems from the 2008 shooting of Michael Carpeso (at the time, a Navy Corpsman) by Santiago (at ...
Views: 0
DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Now before the Court is plaintiff Unión de Periodistas, Artes Gráficas y Ramas *351Anexas’ (“plaintiff’ or “UPAGRA”) motion for default judgement and in compliance with the Court’s order. ECF No. 47.1 For the reasons set forth below, the Court NOTES and GRANTS plaintiffs motion (ECF No. 47).
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 20, 2010, UPAGRA filed the present complaint for enforcem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RE: MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL OF THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
South Dakota Housing Authority, having claimed that it is “caught in the middle” between Plaintiffs and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on the issues raised by the Plaintiffs in their Second Amended Complaint against South Dakota Housing Authority, filed a third-party complai...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiffs, League of Women Voters and fourteen of their members (collectively “LWV” or “plaintiffs”) filed a seven-count Complaint alleging constitutional and state law violations arising from the defendant City of Chicago’s (“City”) new redistricting plan for the 2015 aldermanic elections. Plaintiffs assert that the City has deprived plaintiffs of their right to v...
Views: 0
*928ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO STRIKE
Plaintiff Cheryl Anatole Holmes (“Holmes” or “Plaintiff’) brings this action against Defendants Electronic Document Processing, Inc. (“EDP”) and Tanaya V. Sulcer (“Sulcer”) (collectively, “Defendants”) for alleged' violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”); the Rosenthal Fair Debt ...
Views: 0
Page 116650
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Denying in Part and Granting in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss)
This is a civil rights action against a number of law enforcement and public officials based in Westmoreland County and the Town of Colonial Beach. It is presently b¿fore the Court on a Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Kenneth Blevins, Jr., Kenneth Blevins, Sr., and the Town of Colonial Beach (together the “D...
Views: 0
Page 116651
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment. (Docs. 37, 38.) This case concerns claims by two former Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) trainees who were terminated from the FBI Academy. Plaintiffs allege their termination from the FBI Academy resulted from violations of their constitutional rights of privacy...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff ePlus, Inc.’s (“ePlus”) MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE WHY LAWSON SOFTWARE, INC. SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT (Docket No. 798). For the reasons set forth below, the Court concludes, by clear and convincing evidence, that Lawson Software, Inc. (“Lawson”) is in contempt of the May 23, 2011 Permanent Injunction (Docket No. 729). Accordingly, eP...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is the “petition for certification of issue of law” filed by defendant Ryder Memorial Hospital, Inc. (“Ryder”) on August 8, 2013. (Docket No. 98.) Having considered the arguments contained in defendant Ryder’s motion, as well as the opposition filed by plaintiffs, (Docket No. 99), the Court DENIES defendant Ryder’s petition for certification to the Supreme Co...
Views: 2
Page 116655
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Unión de Tronquistas de Puerto Rico (“plaintiff’ or “Unión”), filed a petition for review of an arbitration award in case number A-l 1-1791 against defen*355dant, the United Parcel Service, Inc., (“UPS” or “defendant”), seeking to annul the award. Unión argues that the Arbitrator committed a manifest error of law when he concluded that the grievant,, Elroy Donovan, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
A district court may refer a pending motion to a magistrate judge for a report and recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R.Civ.P. 72(b); Loc. Rule 72(b). Any party adversely affected by the report and recommendation may file written objections within fourteen days of being served with the magistrate judge’s report. Loc. Rule 72(d). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A pa...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises from a pension plan crisis at Fiddler González & Rodríguez P.S.C., (“FGR”), a law firm based in San Juan, Puerto Rico. See generally ECF No. 1-2. Plaintiffs Pedro J. Polanco-Bezares (“Polanco”), Sylvia Pagán-Casañas and their conjugal partnership (collectively, “plaintiffs”) filed the above-captioned case in the Court of First Instance of Puerto Rico, alleging...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case concerns plaintiff Wizeida L6-pez-Cruz’s (“López”) termination from her employment as a nurse with defendant Instituto de Gastroenterología de PR (the “Institute”) after López requested an accommodation for her allergy to Cidex, a chemical disinfectant. López alleges that her termination was in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The defendant has moved for an order staying this litigation and compelling arbitration of the claims of Kendra Wojtalewicz and the claims assigned to the plaintiffs by Trey, Cole and Gerald Wojtalewicz, and Quaring Pleasant View Farm, LLC (“Quaring”). (Filing No. 28). For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be granted.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This is the defendant’s seco...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
[Re: Docket No. 29]
Plaintiff Patrick Dang (“Plaintiff’), an individual, has brought this putative class action against the National Football League (“NFL”), its member clubs, National Football League Properties, Inc. (“NFLP”), and Reebok International, Ltd. (“Reebok”) — collectively “Defendants.” Plaintiff Dang has alleged that Defendants have engaged ...
Views: 0
Page 116706
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant Camilo Velazquez-Velez (“Velazquez”), defendant Banco Popular’s (“BPPR”), and defendant Luis F. Carlo-Mendoza’s (“Carlo”) motions to dismiss the case and motions for summary judgment. (Docket Nos. 34 & 40.) Also before the Court is plaintiff Abigail Arroyo’s (“Arroyo”) motion for summary judgment. (Docket No. 82.) After reviewing the motions and the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge J. Clay Fuller’s Non-Final Report and Recommendation [20] (“R & R”) on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [6].
I. BACKGROUND
A. Procedural History
On March 13, 2013, Plaintiff Jennifer Chavez (“Plaintiff’) filed this action alleging sex discrimination against her former employer Defendant Credit Nation Auto Sales, Inc. fik/a Syner...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART INTERVEN-ERS’ MOTION TO DISMISS; DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; AND VACATING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
[Docket Nos. 49, 55, 64]
I. Background
Plaintiffs Vivid Entertainment, LLC (“Vivid”) and Califa Productions, Inc., produce adult films. (Compl. ¶¶ 8-9, Docket No. 1.) Plaintif...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS CAUSES OF ACTION 13 AND 14 IN PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendant 3taps, Inc. (“3Taps”) has moved to dismiss Plaintiff craigslist, Inc.’s (“Craigslist”) claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and its state-law counterpart, California Penal Code section 502. The CFAA imposes civil and criminal liability on “whoever ... intentionally accesses ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Contango Operators, Inc. (“Contango”) owns a pipeline that runs along the floor of the Gulf of Mexico. In February of 2010 a dredge owned by Weeks Marine, Inc. (“Weeks Marine”) struck and ruptured that pipeline. Contango and Certain Underwriters Severally Subscribing to Combined Cover Note JHB-CJP-17181 filed this action against Weeks Marine and the United States of...
Views: 0
Page 116790
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ROOSEVELT D. GUY,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1557 (ESH)
THOMAS J. VILSACK,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Roosevel...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________
)
CAUSE OF ACTION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civ. Action No. 1:12-cv-00850-EGS
...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Limit the Opinion Testimony of Robert Miller [DN 48] and their Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Sara Ford [DN 49]. This matter is also before the Court on three dispositive motions filed by the Defendants: (1) their Motion for Summary Judgment on the Plaintiffs Claim for Punitive Damages [DN 50]; (2) the...
Views: 0
ORDER ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendants’ Renewed Motion for Final Summary Judgment, D.E. 26, filed May 29, 2012. Plaintiff filed its Response, D.E. 37, on July 12, 2013. Defendants filed their Reply, D.E. 39, on July 19, 2013. The Motion is now ripe for disposition.
THE COURT has reviewed the Motions and the pertinent portions of the record and is otherwise full...
Views: 0
ORDER
Introduction and Background
Plaintiff instituted the instant action seeking a declaration that it is under no *1238duty to pay for the defense of or to indemnify Defendants Charles Miller and Trent Fricks in an underlying lawsuit against them under the terms of a directors and officers liability insurance policy. The background of the case is as follows: Miller and Fricks worked at Comm...
Views: 0
OPINION
On March 7, 2012, Planet Bingo, LLC sued VKGS, LLC (d/b/a Video King) for patent infringement. (Dkt. No. 1.) On October 19, 2012, following extensive briefing and a hearing, this Court denied, without prejudice, Video King’s motion for summary judgment, which argued that Planet Bingo’s patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for failure to recite patentable subject matter. (Dkt. No. 3...
Views: 0
Page 116929
MEMORANDUM
Before the court for disposition is Defendant Pennsylvania State Trooper Stephen Kleeman’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint of sexual assault and battery in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition.
Background
On April 7, 2010, Defendant Stephen Kleeman, a Pennsylvania Sate Trooper, (herein...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the Freedmen Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration or, in the Alternative, for Certification (“Motion to Reconsider”) (Doc. 190). Therein, the Freedmen Defendants moved for reconsideration of the Court’s Opinion and Order dated March 15, 2013 (Doc. 189), 2013 WL 4537094, which denied the Freedmen Defendants’ Motion to Transfer, Or in the Alternative, to Sta...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Defendant is charged in a three-count indictment with being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2)) and possession of a controlled substance containing cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 844(a)). (Dkt. No. 1) The charges arise from the seizure of a firearm, ammunition, cocaine and related paraphernalia following a search of defendant’s apartment on March 29,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On October 9, 2012, Jacob Burbar (the “Plaintiff’) filed this action in Supreme Court of the State of New York, Nassau County. On March 14, 2013, the state action was removed by the Defendant Incorporated Village of Garden City on the basis of federal question jurisdiction.
Presently before the Court is a motion to dismiss the amended complaint as against the Defe...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff-Relator Ping Chen brings this action against Defendants EMSL Analytical, Inc. (“EMSL”), The Louis Berger Group, Inc. (“Louis Berger”), Taylor Environmental Group, Inc. (“Taylor”), J.C. Broderick & Associates Inc. (“J.C. Broderick”), Hillman Environmental Co., Inc. and Hillman Environmental Group, L.L.C. (together, “Hillman”), Airtek Environmental Corp. (“Airtek”), Li...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED MOTION FOR COURT TO RECONSIDER ITS ORDER REQUIRING ARBITRATION
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Renewed Motion for Court to Reconsider Its Order Requiring Arbitration [DE 72], The Court has considered the motion, Defendant’s response [DE 81], Plaintiffs reply [DE 86], the representations of counsel at the August 16, 2013 hearing, the record in th...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Defendant, St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc. (“St. Jude”), filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint. Plaintiff Jeanne Scianneaux opposes the motion.1 For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS defendant’s motion.
1. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff alleges that she was injured by medical devices that were manufactured and sold by defendant St. Jude. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that she...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises from a collision between a train belonging to BNSF Railway Company and conducted by plaintiff Ronald D. Madden, and a truck driven by defendant Anton Antonov for AV Transportation (collectively, “Antonov”). This matter is before the Court on Antonov’s motion to dismiss or strike (filing 61) portions of BNSF’s cross-claim (filing 33). For the reasons discussed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant, Netsmart Technologies, Inc. (“Netsmart”), to dismiss, filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3) and 12(b)(6) (Filing No. 11, with accompanying brief, Filing No. 12). Plaintiff, Heartland Family Services (“Heartland”), filed a brief in opposition to the motion (Filing No. 13, with accompanying index of evidence, Filing No....
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on several outstanding motions: Defendant’s Motion to Allow Payment of Attorneys’ Fees, Costs and Expenses from Funds Subject to Forfeiture Order [161], Defendant’s Motion to Modify Conditions of Release Pending Appellate Disposition [166], and the Government’s Motion for Forfeiture of Property [174], Having considered the submissions of the parties and the r...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Government, having intervened in what began as a “qui tam” case, brings *601this civil fraud action against defendants Countrywide Financial Corporation, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., and Countrywide Bank, FSB (collectively, “Countrywide”), Bank of America Corporation, and Bank of America, NA (collectively, “BofA”), and individual defendant Rebecca Mairone, the Chief Operating Offic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Liban Muse Jama (“Jama”) filed suit challenging actions taken by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) which resulted in the initiation of removal proceedings against Plaintiff. These actions include (1) the termination of Jama’s refugee status, (2) the denial of his application to adjust status, and (3) the denial of his fraud waiver applic...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant Bollinger (“Defendant” or “Bollinger”) filed a Motion to Dismiss on January 11, 2013. (Doc. No. 22). Specifically, Defendant sought to dismiss his indictment on two grounds, first that Congress exceeded its authority under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution (“Foreign Commerce Clause”) in criminalizing noncommercial illicit sexual contact after traveling in foreign commerce...
Views: 1
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss, (Doc. No. 7), the parties’ briefs and exhibits (Doc. Nos. 8; 9; 11), and the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation (M & R), (Doc. No. 12), recommending that this Court grant Defendants’ Motion in part and deny in part. The parties have not filed objections to the M & R and the time for doing so has expired. Fe...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code exempts entities that are organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, or other specified purposes from having to pay federal income taxes. A condition of this exemption is that the entity not participate in or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for pu...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION; AND OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATIONS OF LAURA HURLEY AND KATHLEEN CA-HILL SLAUGHT
Dkt. Nos. 42, 50, 54
PUBLIC VERSION
I. INTRODUCTION
This action arises under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq. Plaintiff Vinay Karamsetty (“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCS. 26 & 37)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Del Real, LLC (“Del Real”) prepares, packages, and sells fully cooked meat and poultry dishes that are distributed and sold throughout California. Several California counties have threatened enforcement actions against Del Real, alleging that Del Real’s products are packaged in violation ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Defendant is charged in a two-count indictment with unlawful manufacture of 50 or more marijuana plants (21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(c)) and unlawful use of premises for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing and using marijuana (21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(1)). (Dkt. No. 1) The charges arise from the discovery of over 60 marijuana plants as well as various devices and materia...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS UTAH COUNTY, OFFICER MATTHEW HIGLEY AND SHERIFF JIM TRACY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DISMISSAL OF ALL CLAIMS ASSERTED IN PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF DEFENDANTS OFFICER REED VANWAGONER, PROVO CITY, AND DAVID BOLDA
Defendants Sergeant Higley, Sheriff Tracy, and Utah County’s (hereinafter “Defendants”) M...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon two motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), for improper venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3), and for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). The first motion was broúght by Defendants Ceramic Consulting Corporation, Inc. (“Ceramic”), Mario Klappholz (“Klappholz”), and Scott Alp...
Views: 0
This case concerns the sale on April 9, 2012, by defendant AOL, Inc. (“AOL”) of a portfolio of patents to Microsoft Corporation for $1.056 billion in cash. At its heart, the Amended Complaint alleges that AOL, along with defendants Tim Armstrong, AOL’s CEO, and Arthur T. Minson, its CFO, knew the details of the sale long before it was publicly announced, allowing the company to carry out a stock r...
Views: 0
Page 117448
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
PHYLLIS MONTGOMERY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 117502
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Anthony Mills (“Plaintiff’) brings this action pursuant to the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration1 (“SSA”) denying Plaintiffs application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) based on disability. Plaintiff requests that the decision of the Ad...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
CHAIM KAPLAN, et al. )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This is a class action products liability suit against Electrolux North America, Inc. (Electrolux). Plaintiff asserts a variety of common-law and statutory products liability claims against Electrolux. Pending is Electrolux’s partial motion to dismiss plaintiffs common-law products liability claims and strike plaintiffs class allegations (Doc. 9). Plaintiff has filed a response (Doc. 14) to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Steven Clarke brings this suit against his former employer, DynCorp International LLC, under 42 U.S.C. § 1981; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; and the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act (“FEPA”), Md.Code, State Gov’t Art., § 20-606(a), alleging race discrimination, retaliation, and a retaliatory hostile work environment. Now pending i...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION On July 5, 2011, Marc Barrett (“Barrett” or “the petitioner”), acting pro se, filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (doc. # 1), challenging the legality of the sentence imposed on him over two and a half years earlier on September 30, 2008. On October 13, 2011, I ordered that Barrett show cause within thirty days why ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Defendants ASUSTeK Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer International, Inc. (“ACI”) filed a Motion to Dismiss [for lack of personal jurisdiction], or, in the Alternative, to Transfer [to the Northern District of California]. (D.I. 17). The motion was briefed (D.I. 18, 22, 28) and argued. (D.I. 33). The Court granted jurisdictional discovery, and received further jurisdictional b...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Safeco Insurance Company of America brought this suit seeking declaratory judgment against defendant Jennifer Golden. Safeco seeks a judgment declaring that it has no duty to defend or indemnify Golden against a civil suit arising from her husband’s molestation of a minor in *1164their home. The jurisdiction of the court is properly invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (diversit...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On January 22, 2013, Plaintiff Nancy Wiseman, through counsel, filed her First Amended Complaint, asserting eight counts variously against the City of Michigan City, Indiana, the City of Michigan City Department of Cemeteries, Perry Peterson, in his individual and official capacities, and Mark Tomsheck, in his individual and official capacities, as follows: (1) assault and batt...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Deborah Ehling filed this action against Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp. (“MONOC”), Vincent Robbins, and Stacy Quagliana (collectively “Defendants”). This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. There was no oral argument. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78(b). For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ motion for s...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ABOUFAZL BAYATFSHAR, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-450 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Conway for Senate, the principal campaign committee for Jack Conway in his 2010 campaign for United States Senate, brought this action to challenge a civil monetary penalty assessed against it by Defendant Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) for failing to file a required report. The parties have cross-moved for summary judgment (DNs 15 and 16). For the reasons state...
Views: 0
Page 117715
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs motion to remand pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) [DN 11]. Fully briefed, these matters are ripe for decision.
I. BACKGROUND
Jeri’s Café, a restaurant business located in Clay, Kentucky, suffered a fire loss on August 12, 2012. The Plaintiff, Andy Delamar d/b/a Jeri’s Café, filed a claim with his insurance company, Global I...
Views: 0
Page 117743
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Roy A. Jones, Jr. (“Roy Jones”), on behalf of himself and the Estate of Roy Jones III, and Marie Jones, as Administrator of the Estate of Roy Jones III (collectively, “plaintiffs”), commenced this action against Corris Nickens, Jamie Robertson, the County of Suffolk (collectively, the “County defendants”), Roy Burnham, Susan Masciello, Justine Bullock, Kimberly Car...
Views: 0
Page 117745
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs D.B. and M.C. (the “Parents”), on behalf of their minor child E.B. (the “Student”), bring this action pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 el seq. (the “IDEA” or the “Act”).1 The plaintiffs seek review of the April 5, 2012 administrative decision of State Review Officer Justyn P. Bates (“SRO Decision” and “SRO”, respectively...
Views: 0
*432
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Jacqueline Aguirre brings the above-captioned action against Defendants Best Care Agency, Inc. (“Best Care”), Dorothy De Castro and Perlita Jordan, alleging (1) forced labor in violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (“TVPRA”), 18 U.S.C. § 1589 and § 1595; (2) trafficking with respect to involuntary servitude and forced labor in viol...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(August 20, 2013)
Before the Court are the motions of the defendants, Davidson Alfred and Lamorthe Delva, for judgments of acquittal or, in the alternative, for a new trial.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On December 6, 2012, the grand jury returned a three-count indictment (the “Indictment”) against Davidson Alfred (“Alfred”) and Lamorthe Delva (“Delva”). Count One of the In...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of a class of purchasers of bonds issued by or on behalf of Citigroup, Inc., raising claims pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933. They allege that Citigroup made material misstatements or omissions — primarily concerning *151the extent and impact of its exposure to subprime mortgage assets — in public offerings associated with forty-eight...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the court on a Motion to Dismiss by Defendant Gawker Media, LLC (“Gawker”), filed on November 8, 2012, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, asserting failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. (Doc. 6). This motion was supported by Defendant Gawker’s Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 7...
Views: 0
Page 117857
ORDER
Defendants Hualapai Indian Tribe and seven named members of the Hualapai *878Tribal Council have filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Grand Canyon Skywalk Development, LLC’s (“GCSD”) first amended complaint to compel arbitration. Doc. 19; see Doc. 18. The motion has been fully briefed. Docs. 21, 29. Defendants also have filed a motion to disqualify Green-berg Traurig (“GT”) as counsel for GC...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause is before the Court on the following: 1. Defendant’s, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., Supplemented Motion to Dismiss Counts VII and VIII of Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. 25), filed June 26, 2013; 2. Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Defendant Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Counts VII and VIII of Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. 27), filed July ...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Defendant Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 27), which was filed on June 3, 2013. Plaintiffs Joseph and Doris Reilly filed their Response in Opposition to the Motion (Doc. #30) on July 9, 2013. For the reasons that follow, the Motion is denied. I. Background The Reillys purchased a homeowners’ insuranc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
Procedural Background
Defendant William Warren Dodson was indicted on January 10, 2013, with one count of possessing child pornography, involving a prepubescent minor (a minor who had not attained the age of 12); two counts of receiving child pornography involving a prepubescent minor; and two counts of distributing child pornography inv...
Views: 3
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Target Corporation’s Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 198.) The Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs motion on July 30, 2013. Based on the parties’ submissions and arguments, together with all pleadings, records, and files herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Third A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This consolidated matter has its genesis in disputes between a parent, B.K., and her now twenty-year-old special education-eligible child I.K.’s (collectively, “plaintiff’ or “B.K.”) former school district,1 the School District of Haverford Township (“the District”), over certain individualized education issues arising under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR SUA SPONTE DISMISSAL
Before the Court is the Plaintiff’s “Petition to Rescind Foreclosure, Complaint for Damages and Emergency Stay,” filed on February 15, 2012. (DE # 1). On March 25, 2013, the case was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636-639. (DE # 4). On June 12, 2013, the Magistrate Judge entered her report, recommending t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
I, INTRODUCTION .
Plaintiffs Arkansas Teacher Retirement System and State-Boston Retirement Sys*1189tem (“Plaintiffs”) bring this putative securities class action against Netflix, Inc. (“Netflix”); Netflix Co-Founder, Chairman of the Board, and CEO Reed Hastings (“Hastings”); current Netflix CFO David Wells (“Wells”); and Barry McCarthy (“McCarthy”), Netflix’s C...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Elbert Williams, a prisoner in the Illinois Department of Corrections, has asserted claims under federal and state law against Danielle Erickson and Wexford Health Sources, Inc. arising from his contention that he was repeatedly refused assistance in changing his colostomy bag over a four hour period. Defendants have moved to dismiss Williams’ complaint fo...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALDOLPHUS R. GAINES,
Civil Action No. 12-1481 (BJR)
Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON
v. MOTION TO...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
T .M., et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ARMA, S.R.O.,
Petitioner,
v. Civil Action No. 13-494 (JEB)
BAE SYSTEMS OVERSEAS, INC.,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case derives from a contract dispute between ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
BENJAMIN CUNNINGHAM, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Dkt. 25. The Court has considered the pleadings filed regarding the motion, argument of counsel heard on August 1, 2013, and the remaining file.
This case arises from a series of tragedies. It was filed by two men who were convicted in 1993 of brutally raping a woman and...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs claim that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) in approving the Rio Climax Forest Management Project (the Project). The Project would allow logging on 857 acres in the BLM Medford District.
Based on the administrative record, I dismiss this action.
BACKGROUND
After co...
Views: 0
Page 118383
OPINION
Beginning in November 2006, and continuing at least through November 2009, in order for a student to participate in extracurricular activities, such as a school-sponsored sports team, the Haddonfield Board of Education (“HBOE”) required the student’s parent to provide unqualified consent to a school policy that precludes the child from any involvement with drugs and alcohol, on or off sch...
Views: 0
Page 118423
OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants Adam Bell and Rodney Dantzler’s Motion for Summary Judgment (the “Motion for Summary Judgment”) [40]. I. BACKGROUND On April 27, 2012, Plaintiff initiated this action against the Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking “damages for the illegal detention, search, and arrest of Plaintiff, as well as the seizure of Plaintiffs person...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case involves cross-appeals of an opinion issued by an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) in an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) case. Presently before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for judgment on the administrative record.
The Court notes that the parties have labeled their motions as motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Proced...
Views: 0
Page 118481
MEMORANDUM
James Dennis, the petitioner, was wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to die for a crime in all probability he did not commit. I will grant Dennis’ *491habeas petition, vacate his conviction and death sentence, and require the Commonwealth to retry Dennis within 180 days or let him free.
In this habeas petition brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Petitioner James Dennis (“Denni...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER
The Environmental Protection Agency and three similar state entities from Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois initiated this action against U.S. Steel in an 18-count complaint. (For simplicity’s sake, I will refer to the Plaintiffs in this case collectively as the EPA). The EPA alleges that three of U.S. Steel’s plants — one in each of the three states — are and have been violatin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The family of a slain private citizen who purportedly died from unlawful use of police force sued former Puerto Rico Police Department Superintendent Jose Figueroa-Sancha for failure to properly supervise. The strictures of Rule 8 and recent clarification of pleading standards by the Supreme Court and the First Circuit unquestionably protect putative defendants from frivolous ...
Views: 0
Page 118605
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
SHIRLEY M. MILES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Todd Heckman brought this action against defendants Ryder Truck Rental (“Ryder”) and Mickey Truck Bodies (“Mickey”) for serious injuries sustained after a door strap attached to one of the defendants’ trucks broke while Heckman was delivering beer for his employer, Wantz Distributors, Inc. (‘Wantz”). The following motions are fully briefed and pending before the court: (I) ...
Views: 0
*364
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the court is an emergency motion by Plaintiffs Maroc Fruit Board S.A. (“Maroc”) and Wafa Assurance, S.A. for an international antisuit injunction.
In brief, Plaintiffs commenced this action against Star Reefers Shipowning, Inc. (“Star Reefers”) and its vessel, the Almeda Star, in November 2011. Maroc enlisted Star Reefers and the Almeda Star to ship thousands of...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
STANFORD B. HOOKER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
...
Views: 0
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of Judgment
This case was tried to the Court from July 22 to 25, 2013. Plaintiff Stephen Brett Ryals challenges the constitutionality of the City of Englewood’s Ordinance 34, which restricts where certain sex offenders — including Mr. Ryals — may reside. Mr. Ryals brings five claims under three theories, arguing that the ordinance (1) is preempted by...
Views: 1
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 13) The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (doc. 13), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Rec...
Views: 0
ORDER
Cristina Ramirez. (Doc. 24.) The briefing on that Motion has also produced a Motion to Strike. (Doc. 37.) The Court held oral argument on August 13, 2013. For reasons discussed below, the Court grants in part and denies in part both Motions.
BACKGROUND1
Ramirez has brought several tort claims against Medtronic that challenge how Medtronic has produced and promoted its Infuse device. Ramirez...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ita Cohen (“Cohen”) brought this action on behalf of herself and a purported class of similarly situated persons against defendant Capital One, N.A. (“Capital One”), alleging violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1693 et seq. and its implementing regulations 12 C.F.R. § 205.1 et seq. (hereinafter referred to collectively as the “EFTA”). The Cou...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Jeremy Wilborn, by his next friend and conservator, Tara Wilborn, filed this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, the federal question statute against the Defendants: Larry Martin, Interim Commissioner, Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration; Darin Gordon, Deputy Commissioner and Director, TennCare Bureau and Patti Killingsworth, Assistant Commissioner, Chief of Long-T...
Views: 0
OPINION
On July 31, 2003, this Court awarded plaintiff Motorola Credit Corporation (“Motorola”) datnages in the amount of $2,132,896,906 against defendants Kemal Uzan, Murat Hakan Uzan, Cem Cengiz Uzan, Melahat Uzan, Aysegul Akay, and Antonio Luna Betancourt (the “Uzans”), based on the Uzans’ diversion of large loans made by plaintiffs to Telsim, a Turkish telecommunications company owned in la...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. Introduction
On March 30, 2012, Plaintiffs Valerie Forsman and Lloyd Gruber (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed their Complaint and Class Action Claims against United Financial Casualty Company and Progressive1 (collectively “Defendants”), alleging that Defendants breached their automobile insurance contracts and violated Montana’s “made whole” doctrine by denying their collision claims af...
Views: 0
AMENDED DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, a member of defendant Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 282, (“Local 282”) originally brought this action against tile international organization, Amalgamated Transit Union (the “International”). On March 30, 2012,- after the International successfully moved to dismiss the complaint against it on the grounds that it was an improper party, plai...
Views: 0
Page 119022
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART KRAUSE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Sharon Krause’s (“Krause”) second motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 139). The Court has considered the pleadings filed in support of and in opposition to the motion and the remainder of the file and hereby grants in part and denies in part the motion for the reasons stat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Joseph Healey, Tom O’Driscoll, Alan Porter, James B. Howland, Karl Die-de, Jim Timothy, and John Ryan have sued International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 134 (the union), Freeman Electrical, Inc., Global Experience Specialists, Inc. (GES), and the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority (MPEA). They assert claims for breach of th...
Views: 0
Page 119115
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
M.J., a minor, by and through
Bianca Jarvis, his parent and
natural guardian,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 13-283 (GK)
v.
Georgetown University Medical
Center, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 1
Page 119135
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
J. INTRODUCTION........................................................972
A. Procedural Background..............................................972
B. Factual Background.................................................972
1. Summary of the evidence.........................................972
a. Medical evidence......
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before me on consideration of the following: the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (docket nos. 13 and 20); the Report and Recommendation (“Report”) of United States Magistrate Judge Robert S. Ballou (docket no. 24); Plaintiffs objections (docket no. 25) to the Report; and the response (docket no. 26) to Plaintiffs objections, filed by the Commissioner...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff Angela Johnson worked for the Village of Dolton as Village Fire Inspector until her termination in December 2010. In this lawsuit, Johnson contends she was terminated for political reasons — specifically, her support for a slate of candidates for Board of Trustees favored by the May- or’s political rival. Defendants, the Village and its Mayor, Ronnie Lewis, have moved for summary...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
I. SYNOPSIS
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s “Motion for Summary Judgment, or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication.” (Doc. No. 62) and Plaintiffs “Partial Motion for Summary Judgment.” (Doc. No. 66). Each party opposes the other’s motion and each motion has been fully briefed. For the reasons that follow, the Court will DENY Defendant’...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Wanda Santiago, a retired flight attendant, brought this suit under the Railway Labor Act (“RLA”), 45 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., against United Air Lines, Inc., her former employer, and the Association of Flight Attendants — CWA (“AFA”), the union that represents United flight attendants. Doc. 1. Santiago alleges that United violated the RLA by failing to submit to arbit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the parties’ Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Teamsters Local 673 (hereinafter, the “Plaintiff’ or “Teamsters”), is a labor union headquartered in West Chicago, Illinois. Defendant Obe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Susan Spitz claims defendants Proven Winners North America, LLC (“PW”) and EuroAmerican Propagators, LLC (“Euro”) contracted with her to use her “Marketing Concept” related to pet-safe plants and thereafter used the Concept, but failed to pay her any fee. In the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), plaintiff describes her Marketing Concept as follows:
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Seguoia Insurance Company’s Motion (# 12) for Summary Judgment. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion and DISMISSES Plaintiffs’ claims against Seguoia.
BACKGROUND
The following facts are taken from the Joint Statement of Agreed Facts and the parties summary-judgment materials.
The Westbrook Apartments w...
Views: 0
Page 119418
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, plaintiff Main Street Legal Services, Inc. (“Main Street”) seeks an order directing the National Security Council (“the NSC” or “the Council”) to produce records pertaining to the use of drone strikes for targeted killings of suspected international terrorists, including American citizens, as well as all NSC...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On August 10, 2012, the Plaintiff Susan Pieper d/b/a Pet Expressions (the “Plaintiff’ or “Pieper”) commenced this action alleging a racketeering scheme and conspiracy to commit racketeering under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. (“RICO”). In this regard, the Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant Ron Coiro (“Coiro”) th...
Views: 0
Page 119537
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending are cross-motions for partial summary judgment filed by Plaintiffs Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Inc., West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Inc., Coal River Mountain Watch, and Sierra Club (“Plaintiffs”), ECF No. 55, and Defendant Marfork Coal Co., Inc. (“Marfork”), ECF No. 50. For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS in part Marfork’s motion as t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendants Village of Bellwood, Frank A. Pasquale and Lena M. Moreland’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint. [ECF No. 12] For the reasons stated herein, Defendants’ Motion is denied in part and granted in part. I. BACKGROUND The Village of Bellwood (the “Village”) employed Plaintiff Michael P. Drager (“Plaintiff’) as an electrical inspector fr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this putative class action, a group of Singapore investors (“Plaintiffs”) assert various claims against Morgan Stanley & Co. and certain of its affiliates (collectively, “Defendants”), related to a series of credit-linked notes (the “Pinnacle Notes” or the “Notes”) issued by Defendant Pinnacle Performance Limited (“Pinnacle”) and purchased by Plaintiffs. On October 31, 2011...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In a Second Amended Complaint (the “SAC”), plaintiffs allege that James S. Tagliaferri and Patricia J. Cornell, investment managers, made numerous improper investments and engaged in a “kickback” scheme with a thoroughbred horse racing company. Against Tagliaferri and Cornell, the SAC alleges violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 ...
Views: 0
Page 119626
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
LINDA RAMSEUR, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
...
Views: 0
ORDER LIFTING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs have moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, seeking to enjoin Federal Defendants from making certain “flow augmentation” releases of water from Trinity Reservoir beginning on August 13, 2013. Docs. 14 & 16. The stated purpose of the planned releases is to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Antwuan Ball, Desmond Thurston, and Joseph Jones were convicted of distribution of cocaine base (“crack”) and are currently appealing their sentences in the court of appeals. The defendants moved for release pending their appeal. Because the defendants have not met their burden to show that they pose no flight risk or danger to the community during releas...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
DAVID JACK BAROUCH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is a collective action involving claims on behalf of more than 1,700 cable technicians who worked under what they allege was a “culture of off-the-clock work,” wherein they were expected to perform over an hour of uncompensated work each day. Pending before the Court are Motions to Decertify (Docket Nos. 674 and 676) and Motions to Dismiss the Collective Action (Docket Nos. 604 ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On August 8, 2013, I heard argument on Caterpillar’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents related to Plaintiffs’ attempts to secure funding from third-party sources who were solicited by Miller to help with financing the litigation. During the hearing, I expressed my view that Caterpillar had waived the argument that the documents sought were relevant to the ques...
Views: 0
ORDER ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment, D.E. 38, filed on July 12, 2013. Defendants filed a Response, D.E. 47, and Plaintiff filed a Reply, D.E. 49. The Motion is now ripe for disposition.
THE COURT has reviewed the Motions and the pertinent portions of the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court previously d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM FINAL ORDER
This matter comes before the court for the sole purpose of resolving Ground One of the Petitioner’s Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (“Motion”), filed on November 5, 2012 (ECF No. 65), together with an accompanying Memorandum in Support. The Motion claimed several grounds for relief. In Ground One, the Petitioner argued that his forme...
Views: 0
Page 119914
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Edward Eliot Kramer’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion for a Preliminary and Permanent Injunction [2], Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Second Amendment to Verified Complaint [12], and Defendants’ First Motion for Summary Judgment [13].
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff is a pre-trial detainee at the Gwinnett County Jail (the “Jail”) and has been there since Ja...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court are:
1. Plaintiff Wanda G. Miranda (“Miranda”)’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s Order at Docket 118, (Docket 151); the motion in opposition filed by defendant Deloitte Tax LLP, (Docket 175); plaintiff *382Miranda’s reply, (Docket 181); and defendant’s motion to strike plaintiffs reply, (Docket 183);
2. the motion for leave to announce an expert wit...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Plaintiff Federal Housing Financing Agency (“FHFA”) brought this lawsuit on its own behalf and on behalf of the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) against Defendant City of Chicago. R. 1. FHFA alleges that an ordinance passed by the Chicago City Council in July 2011 unlawfully regulates F...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
RICARDO SMITH, on behalf of himself )
and all others similarly situated, )
)
Pl...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
OCEANA et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY
MANAGEMENT et al.,
Civil Action 12-981 (RC)
Defendants,
...
Views: 0
Page 120031
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter arises from adversary proceedings brought by Chapter 7 Trustee Charles M. Ivey, III (“Trustee”) in the involuntary bankruptcy case of Debtor James Edwards Whitley (“Whitley” or “Debtor”). Before the court is the Joint Motion to Withdraw Reference to the United States Bankruptcy Court filed by Defendants Joseph E. Mason, Faye Swof-ford, Robert P. Swofford...
Views: 1
Page 120050
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth (“KFTC”) and the Sierra Club, brought this action seeking a declaration that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“the Corps”) violated the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) and the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) in issuing a permit to Leeco, Inc. (“Leeco”), authorizing the corporation to mine-through and fill several unnamed tribut...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CONCERNING COUNT TV
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Conservation Law Foundation (“CLF”) and Buzzards Bay Coalition,'Inc. (“BBC”) assert in their First Amended Complaint (the “FAC”) four claims under § 208 Clean Water Act (the “CWA”), 83 U.S.C. § 1288, and the Administrative Procedure Act (the “APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 706(2). In general, plaintiffs allege that the Environmental Protect...
Views: 0
ORDER
This court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the July 16, 2013, Report and Recommendation [# 47] of Magistrate Judge Dien. For the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, this court hereby orders that:
1. Plaintiff National Association of Government Employees, Inc.’s (“NAGE”) Motion to Strike Counterclaims [# 40] is ALLOWED. The court treats the verified counterclaim as an affidavit in suppo...
Views: 0
Page 120106
ORDER DENYING NEW BREED’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART NEW BREED’S MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART NEW BREED’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
Before the Court are Defendant New Breed Logistics’ (“New Breed”) Motion for *1006Judgment as a Matter of Law (D.E. # 236) and Motion for New Trial or to Amend Judgment (D.E. #...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Now pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment filed by DaVita Rx, LLC, Inc. (“DaVita”), and Richard Rowe (“Mr. Rowe”) (collectively, the “defendants”) in this suit brought by plaintiff Brandy Miles (“Ms. Miles”).1 Ms. Miles, a former DaVita employee, alleges hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 20)
Christopher Smith brings this action seeking to recover damages from Encore Capital Group Inc., Midland Funding LLC., and Midland Credit Management Inc. (“MCM”) Smith claims that the defendants are debt collectors and violated numerous provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) along with the Fair Debt Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Memorandum Opinion addresses:
(1)Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint filed by Defendants Nationwide Insurance Company, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Nationwide General Insurance Company, Eric C. Hitzel, Andrew B. Greenspan, and the Law Offices of Andrew B. Greenspan, ECF No. 7, and supporting Memorandum (“Defs.’ Dismissal Mem.”), ECF No. 7-1; Plaintiff Sea...
Views: 1
Page 120175
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
An actionable securities fraud claim requires more than a frustrated investor. Nevertheless, that is all we have here. Lead plaintiff Boilermaker-Blacksmith National Pension Trust (“plaintiff’) filed this putative class action on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased the common stock of global automotive supplier Magna International Inc. (“Magna” or the “Company”)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant UNUM Insurance Company of America’s (“UNUM”) , Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21) and Plaintiff Janet Hilton’s (“Hilton”) Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 58). This case involves the interpretation and application of an express limitation to Plaintiffs long-term disability benefits by the administrator of an emp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On July 18, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen Tomlinson issued a report and recommendation recommending that this Court deny a motion by Plaintiffs’ counsel to enforce a charging lien upon *617Defendants pursuant to New York Judiciary Law § 475. Dkt. No. 42. For the reasons set forth below, Magistrate Judge Tomlinson’s report and recommendation is ADOPTED in its...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
NORMAN MERO, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil...
Views: 0
ORDER RE MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY
INTRODUCTION
In this putative class action, defendants move to compel arbitration and stay this action. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and to stay is Granted.
STATEMENT
This action concerns plaintiff Bipinkumar Naria’s claim under California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (“CMIA”). Cal. Civ.Code § 56...
Views: 0
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120449: Communications Workers of America v. YP Texas Region Yellow Pages, LLC
Page 120449
ORDER DENYING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”). A hearing was held July 3, 2013, at which counsel for both parties appeared. Plaintiff (“the Union”) and Defendant are parties to a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) that is effective through December 6, 2013. For the reasons set forth below, the motion ...
Views: 0
ORDER Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Doc. 10). For the reasons below, the motion will be denied. BACKGROUND Defendant owns, operates, leases or leases to others a shopping center, which is a place of public accommodation. Plaintiffs son, Michael George, is disabled as a result of muscular dystrophy, and requires a wheelchair for mobility. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff and his so...
Views: 0
Page 120456
*395
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (“ILIAC”) is a service provider that offers investment options and recordkeeping services to 401 (k) retirement plans. In other words, ILIAC offers a platform from which retirement plans access different investment vehicles, such as mutual funds. Service providers typically charge 401(k) plans fees for their services. A wide...
Views: 0
Page 120499
MEMORANDUM
Background
The above-captioned action is one seeking review of a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Plaintiff Jo Ann Weitzel’s claim for social security disability insurance benefits.
Weitzel protectively filed her application for disability insurance benefits on March 18, 2008. Tr. 17, 64, 97-101 and 108.1 The application was initially denied ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
:
GLEN CARTER, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : Civil Act...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
K.S., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-624 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Dudley and Elizabeth Snee, acting on beha...
Views: 0
Page 120561
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LANNY J. DAVIS & ASSOCIATES LLC, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-1787 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KINGMAN PARK CIVIC ASSOCIATION,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-990 (CKK)
VINCENT C. GRAY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(August 26, 2013)
...
Views: 0
Page 120563
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Janet Mavis Marcusse, :
:
Plaintiff, :
v. : Civil Action No. 12-1025 (CKK)
:
United States Department :
of Jus...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
NICOLE ARMBRUSTER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Acti...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
YVETTE STREET,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-557(CKK)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(August 26, 2013)
Plai...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
RACHEL BERNSTEIN, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KEON BLAKE,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1349 (JEB)
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES,
INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case arises out of an unusual and unfortu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is pending for consideration of Defendants Diversified Clinical Services, Ine.’s (“DCS”), and Austin Day’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion for Sanctions. [Record Nos. 36, 43] The defendants contend that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. [Record No. 36] Additionally, they seek sanc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This class action concerns an alleged price-fixing conspiracy in the market for titanium dioxide.1 The Plaintiff class representatives Haley Paint Company, Isaac Industries, Inc., and East Coast Colorants, LLC, doing business as Breen Color Concentrates, and the class of titanium dioxide purchasers whom they represent (together, “Plaintiffs”) claim that Defendants Kronos Worl...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on May 15, 2013 his Recommended Decision (Doc. No. 55). The Defendants filed their Objection to the Recommended Decision (Doc. No. 56) on May 29, 2013. Plaintiff filed its Objection to the Recommended Decision and Opposition to Defendants’ Objection (Doc. No. 57) on June 17, 20...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Pending before the Court is Claimant Omar Steele’s motion to dismiss, and, in the alternative, motion for a more definite statement. Because the United States has stated its claim with particularity and provided sufficient facts to support a reasonable belief that it can meet its burden at trial, the motion shall be denied. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Between November of 2011 and Jan...
Views: 0
Page 120674
*609
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Introduction
On March 29, 2013, we issued a Memorandum and Order granting in part and denying in part defendants’ motions to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaints (the “March 29 Order”). In re LIBOR-Based Fin. Instruments Antitrust Litig. (Mar. 29 Order), 935 F.Supp.2d 666 (S.D.N.Y.2013). Specifically, we dismissed plaintiffs’ antitrust and RICO claims in full; we dismisse...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER By Order dated June 24, 2011, this Court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of defendant Alberto Castellano (“Castellano”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (“§ 2255”) to vacate, set aside, or otherwise correct his sentence. See Castellano v. United States, 795 F.Supp.2d 272 (S.D.N.Y.2011). Castellano claimed ineffective assistance of counsel based on his counsel’s fai...
Views: 0
Page 120682
*613MEMORANDUM
Certain cases on the 02-md-875 Maritime Docket (MARDOC), listed in the attached exhibits
*614I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................614
II. LEGAL STANDARD ....................................................616
A. Motions to Dismiss based on Lack of Personal Jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(2)...........................................................616...
Views: 0
Page 120689
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This action arises out of a contract between Chester County Aviation Holdings *1101(“CCAH”), a fixed-base operator (“FBO”)1 , and Chester County Aviation Authority (the “Aviation Authority” or “Authority”), a municipal agency under Chester County, Pennsylvania. The contract permitted CCAH to provide various services in connection with the day-to-day operations of G.O. Ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On April 15, 2013 the Court heard argument on Plaintiffs’ pending motion for class certification. (Doc. 99). Plaintiffs claim that Defendant Sturm Foods, a dry grocery manufacturer and distributor, and Defendant Treehouse, as Sturm’s sole owner, violated the consumer protection statutes and unjust enrichment laws of the eight named states with regard to their Grove Square C...
Views: 0
ORDER
The above matter comes to me following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Victor E. Bianchini, duly filed on the 29th day of July 2013. Following fourteen (14) days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent me the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein.
After careful review of all of the papers herein, including the Magistrate Judge’s Report-Recomme...
Views: 0
Page 120759
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ISABEL VIKTORIA STEHN,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 11-1036 (CKK)
GREGORY CODY
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(August 26, 2013)
...
Views: 0
Page 120764
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BANK OF AMERICA, N. A.,
As Indenture Trustee, Custodian, and
Collateral Agent for OCALA FUNDING,
LLC,
Plaintiff and Counterclaim
Defendant,
Civil Action No. 10-CV-1681 (BJR)
v.
...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
D.K., a minor, by his parents, )
PAUL and MELISSA KLEIN, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE )
COMMISSION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING POWER & TEL’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND I.P. NET’S MOTION FOR STAY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
/. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1068
A. Factual Background................................................1069
B. Procedural Background.............................................1071
1072 II. ANALYSIS...............................
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the parties’ cross Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law [Docket No. 19 and 20]. The motions have been fully briefed by the parties [Docket Nos. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26]. The Court having reviewed the parties’ briefs as well as the Administrative Record [Docket No. 15] finds that the Defendant is entitled to judgment as a mat...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ' GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS-
Before the Court is the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Claim for Violations of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, Bad Faith Penalties, and Punitive and Trefilé Damages filed on November 27, 2012. (DE #13). Plaintiff filed a response in opposition on Decem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. [Docket No. 10] The Court heard oral argument on June 7, 2013. For the reasons that follow, the Court grants in part and denies in part Defendant’s motion.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
1. The Parties
Plaintiff Gregory F. McCracken (“McCracken”) was hired as a custodian at ...
Views: 0
ORDER
The above-entitled matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated June 24, 2013. [Docket No. 46] Plaintiffs I.E.C. and J.R. filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. [Docket No. 47] Defendants Minnesota Department of Education and Brenda Cassellius responded to Plaintiffs’ objections. [Docket No. 48] Defendan...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court upon the motion to dismiss by defendants (collectively, MERS Defendants).1 Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, the motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
This dispute arises out of the MERS Defendants’ failure to record mortgage assignments with Minnesota county recorders.
MERS & Mortgage-Backed Securities
In th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION UNDER RULE 59(E) TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FINDINGS AND RULINGS CONCERNING THE PRE-SUIT NOTICES UNDER G.L.C. 183A, § 6(C) (DOCKET ENTRY # 66); MOTION OF THE DEFENDANT, MARCUS, ERRICO, EMMER & BROOKS, P.C., FOR RECONSIDERATION AND/OR TO ALTER AND AMEND JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY #68)
After a six day non-jury trial, this court issued findings and ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER
Plaintiff Taynereon LeBlanc (“LeBlanc”) filed this Title VII action against her former employer Defendant C.R. England, Inc. (“England”) and supervisor Defendant Jeffrey Price (“Price”) alleging sexual harassment and assault during her employment at England’s trucking company. England denies the allegations and moves the Court to dismiss the case pursuant to Fe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Stew Farm, Ltd. brings this action for money damages and declaratory judgment against the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Pickaway County Soil and Water Conservation District, and private Defendants Watershed Management, LLC, Carl Hamman, and Douglas Kohli. This matter is before the Court on Defendant Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Motion to Dis...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are the parties’ memoranda regarding the timeliness of the plaintiffs’ claims, which this Court ordered after it indicated that it was inclined to grant summary judgment independent of a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f)(3).1 After considering the complaint, the amended complaint, the parties’ memoranda, the record, and the applicable la...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) to dismiss the claim of plaintiff Wilbur Babin, Jr. (the “Trustee”) for aiding and abetting the breach of fiduciary duty, filed by defendant George Schuler.1 The Trustee opposes the motion.2 For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
Wilbur Babin, Jr. is the trustee for the ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal Action No. 13-65 (RWR)
)
WILLIAM HUBBARD, )
)
Defendant. ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Houslanger & Associates, PLLC (“Houslanger” or “Defendant”), has moved, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (“12(b)(6)”), to dismiss the amended complaint (“AC”) of plaintiff Zakari Musah (“Musah” or “Plaintiff’) for failure to state a claim. Based upon the conclusions set forth below, the Defendant’s motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Prior Proceedings
On April 24, 2...
Views: 0
Page 121153
AMENDED MEMORANDUM DECISION
*
Before the Court is defendant Dow Kim’s motion to preclude plaintiff Michael L. Pasternak from calling Stephanie Planeich, Ph.D., as an expert witness at trial. Dr. Plancieh would testify that Pasternak suffered lost income of some $8.65 million for the period from September 4, 2007 through September 30, 2011. (Plancieh Report at 6). As calculated by Dr. Plancieh...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Natural Molecular Testing Corporation’s (“Defendant” or “NMTC”) Motion for a Protective Order and to Quash Subpoenas (“Motion”). The parties have fully briefed the issues, and the Court finds that additional oral argument is unnecessary for their resolution. Accordingly, for the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendant’s Motion. BACKGR...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Kristen Forrest, initiated this matter by filing a complaint on November 12, 2012 against the Defendant, Genpact Services, LLC, alleging that Defendant violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”) and the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (“FDCPA”) by placing calls to Plaintiffs cell phone while attempting to collect...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING MOTION OF DEFENDANTS ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY AND THE McGREGOR SCHOOL AT ANTIOCH TO ENFORCE THE SETTLEMENT AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS INCLUDING ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS (DOC. #50); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF ANTHONY A. TOCCI’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (DOC. #91); SAID DEFENDANTS ARE ORDERED TO FILE, WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS, A MEMORANDUM QUANTIFYING THE ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS INC...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment. Doc. No. 12. The Court has reviewed the motion papers and concludes that no hearing is necessary. See Loc. R. 105.6 (D.Md. 2011). For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s Motion will be GRANTED.1
I. BACKGROUND
The following is taken from Plaintiffs Complaint and the adm...
Views: 0
Order re: Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment
Plaintiff Alma Clarisa Hernandez, who has used a wheelchair since 2004, brought this action under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., alleging that architectural barriers at Defendant Polanco Enterprises, Inc.’s gasoline station denied her full and equal enjoyment and use of the facility, including the s...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This case asks whether winter weather conditions on a severe, downhill section of *887Hilltop Road in Wausau, Wisconsin, should, in fact, have kept a U.S. mail carrier from “the swift completion of [his] appointed rounds,” or at least from doing so behind the wheel of a truck. On December 9, 2009, plaintiff Stephen Zick was struck from behind by a slow-moving, but out-of-control,...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This case arises out of a bankruptcy petition filed by plaintiff Suzannah Meta Schmid under chapter 13 of the bankruptcy code. After defendants Bank of America, N.A. and Associated Bank, N.A. filed claims against the estate for approximately $40,000 and $30,000 respectively, plaintiff objected to the claims and filed an adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy court. Plaintiff did ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ALI NESSAR,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-627 (JEB)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
For almost twenty years, Plaintiff Ali Nessar was employed ...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
ANGELA BURNS-RAMIREZ, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1720 (RMC)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FOLASHADE J. OJELADE, :
:
Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 12-1964 (RC)
:
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ROBERT LEE JOHNSON,
Civil Action No. 11-1702
Plaintiff, DAR
v.
INTERSTATE MANAGEMENT CO., LLC,
Def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court are Motions To Dismiss filed by Defendants BankUnited, N.A. (“BankUnited”), Castle Mortgage Company (“Castle”), Sirote & Permutt (“Sirote”), Ryan Daugherty (“Mr. Daugherty”), Ginny Rutledge (“Ms. Rutledge”), and Andrew P. Benefield (“Mr. Benefield”) (collectively, “Defendants”). (Docs. 33, 35, 37). Aso before the court is Defendants’ joint Motion To Strike (D...
Views: 1
*396
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the motion of Defendants Denise Schuh, Tara Broglin, Officer (FNU) Torres; and Officer (FNU) McCloy for summary judgment. [Docket Item 43.] There is also a pending unopposed motion for leave to file a sur-reply and/or strike which was filed in response to Defendants’ reply brief. [Docket Item 55.] The Court heard oral argument on b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case involves claims under the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Alabama Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 18). On June 14, 2013, the magistrate judge assigned this case entered a Report and Recommendation, finding that the moti...
Views: 0
Page 121557
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Council. (D.E. 160). Plaintiffs have asked the Court to certify one General Class and four subclasses. Also currently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the claims of named plaintiffs D.I., S.R.,1 M.R., and J.R., Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Fourth Amended ...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Gentiva Health Services, Inc.’s (“Gentiva”) Motion to Exceed Page Limits for Dispositive Motions [Doc. No. 497], Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Expert Report and Testimony of Alfred H. Perry, or, in the Alternative, Notice of Objection to the Same [Doc. No. 578], Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike the Declaration and Testimony of Alfred B. Robinson, Jr., or,...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_____________________________
)
JOHN PAULINE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 08-1788 (RWR)
)
UNITED STATES ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
CHARLENE JOHNSON, )
Parent and Next Friend of F.J., a minor, and )
)
F.J., )
Individually, ...
Views: 0
Page 121625
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
WORLD CLASS CONSTRUCTION )
MANAGEMENT GROUP, ET AL. )
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
Page 121627
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
DELIA L. HOUSEAL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 1...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LAURA SENNETT,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-495 (JEB)
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Laura Sennett – a photojournalist who claims a spe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Doe 17 to sever or dismiss for misjoinder or, in the alternative, to quash the subpoena issued to Doe 17’s Internet Service Provider (ISP). Also before the Court is the motion to quash filed by an unknown Doe defendant. Plaintiff has responded in opposition to these motions. I. Background Plaintiff is a company that ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this insurance coverage dispute a mine owner seeks to be considered an additional insured on policies issued to one of its contractors. Two workers injured in a crane accident on the property have sued the mine owner in Wyoming. The insurance policies were issued to a contractor who did work on the site before the men were injured. The contractor’s policies say they will...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court pursuant to Defendant Geico General Insurance Company’s motion for judgment as a matter of law, filed March 4, 2013 [DE 135], Plaintiff Sharon Harris (“Harris”) responded on March 14, 2013 [DE 139]. Geico replied on April 4, 2018 [DE 148]. Harris filed a supplemental response...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs bring this age and gender discrimination action against their former employer, Goodwill of Kentucky, Inc., under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), and the Kentucky Civil Rights Act, along with state-law claims against Goodwill and its employees for intentional infliction of emotional distr...
Views: 0
Page 121703
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This action is brought under Section 306(l)(d) of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (“Section 306” or the “4-R Act”), 49 U.S.C. § 11501(b)(4), which prohibits state and local governments from discriminating against railroads with respect to taxation. Plaintiff contends that the sales and use tax assessments imposed by the State...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM CONTEMPT ORDER; DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECU-SAL, AND DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO VACATE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Dkt. Nos. 269, 274, 277)
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendants Biolitec AG (“BAG”), Biomed Technology Holdings Ltd. (“Biomed”), and Wolfgang Neuberger1 have filed a motion for relief from the contempt order issued against them (Dk...
Views: 0
Page 121793
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES Plaintiff Colin Bower brought this action on his own behalf and in his capacity as the guardian of his two minor children after his former wife, defendant Mirvat El-Nady, fled to Cairo, Egypt, in August of 2009, taking the children with her without his consent and in violation of a Massachusetts court order granting sole custody to Bower. In his Amende...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a declaratory judgment action brought by Plaintiff, Lapolla Industries, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “Lapolla”), seeking a judgment declaring that the Defendant insurers are obligated to defend and indemnify Plaintiff in connection with a personal injury action now pending in this court (the “Underlying Action”). Presently before the court is the motion of Defendants, pursuan...
Views: 0
Page 121802
ORDER This cause is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation [15] of the United States Magistrate Judge, after referral of hearing by this Court. Magistrate Judge Ball considered the parties’ submissions and concluded that Defendant’s Motion to Affirm the Decision of the Commissioner [12] should be granted and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [10] should be denied. Plaintiff filed a...
Views: 0
Page 121838
ORDER: (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 45); AND (2) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 44)
This civil action is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (Docs. 44, 45) and responsive memoranda (Docs. 50, 51, 52, 58).
I. BACKGROUND FACTS
This civil action centers on a dispute between an insurer and a named insured for premium...
Views: 0
Page 121868
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Presently pending before the Court are the motion for summary judgment of *741Plaintiffs Amir A. Isbell, Bergina Brick-house Isbell, and their minor children J.B. and A.I. (doc. 53) and the motion for summary judgment of Defendants Craig Patterson, Rachel Wade, Julie Spencer, and Montour County (doc. 58), each of which has been fully briefed. After considered review of the su...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 60)
This civil action is before the Court on Defendants’1 joint motion to dismiss (Doc. *85660), and the parties’ responsive memoranda (Docs. 64, 65).
I. FACTS AS ALLEGED BY THE PLAINTIFF
For purposes of this motion to dismiss; the Court must: (1) view the third amended complaint (“TAC”) in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff; and (2) ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Estrada. In his Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Estrada recommends denying in part and granting in part Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motions for summary judgment, the objections are denied.1
Accordingly, ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 43), filed by Defendants, the City of Slidell and six of its employees. Plaintiff has filed an opposition (Rec. Doc. 44). The Defendants’ motion was set for hearing, on the briefs, on June 19, 2013. Having considered the motion and legal memoranda, the record, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the Defendan...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, to Compel Arbitration on a Consolidated Basis (Rec. Doc. 7), filed by Defendants, David Zaroff, Tom Hymanson, and AJJN Group, LLC (collectively “AJJN Group”). Plaintiff, Planet Beach Franchising Corporation (“Planet Beach”), has filed an opposition (Rec. Doc. 16), to which the AJJN Group has replied (Rec....
Views: 0
ORDER
On this day, the Court considered Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 2, in the above-captioned case. As explained below, Plaintiffs statutory claims of discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Texas Labor Code are sufficiently alleged to withstand Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Defendant’s Motion is therefore denied as to these claims. D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On December 23, 2011, plaintiff Samuel K. Dogbe (“plaintiff’) filed the instant action against defendants Delta Air Lines, Inc. (“Delta”), Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij, N.V., also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (“KLM”), the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (“the Port Authority”), John Doe, Jane Doe 1, and Jane Doe 2. (ECF No. 1, Compl.) On April 16, 2012,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Carol Whyte (“Whyte” or “plaintiff’) commenced this action against defendants Nassau Health Care Corporation (“NHCC”) and Rita Bernhardt (“Bernhardt”) (collectively “defendants”) asserting claims of race-based and national-origin-based discrimination and retaliatory employment practices in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1...
Views: 0
Page 121958
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Variblend Dual Dispensing Systems, LLC (“Variblend”) sues defendant Seidel GmbH & Co. KG (“Seidel”) for alleged tortious conduct regarding proprietary trade secrets previously licensed to Seidel by Innopump, Inc., d/b/a Versadial (‘Versadial”), a non-party to this action. Variblend alleges that it is the assignee of Versadial’s rights under its agreement with Seidel. S...
Views: 0
*1298 ORDER TRANSFERRING VENUE THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer Venue to the Southern District of Ohio (DE # 10), filed April 1, 2013. For the reasons discussed below, the Court, being briefed on the matter,1 finds that venue should be transferred to the Southern District of Ohio and the above-styled action should be closed. On February 12, 2013, ...
Views: 1
ORDER
The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Poliak dated August 9, 2013, to which no objections have been filed, is adopted in its entirety. The Court grants Plaintiffs motion for a default judgment and directs the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment in the amount of $14,914.34, consisting of: (1) $4,378.63 in unpaid Required Contributions, (2) $7,035.29 in interest, (3) ...
Views: 0
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Panoramic Stock Images, Ltd., brought this suit against John Wiley & Sons, Inc., alleging direct and contributory infringement under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 501 et seq., and common law fraud. Doc. 1. Before the court is Wiley’s partial motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) and 12(b)(6). Doc. 9. The motion is denied.
Background
In c...
Views: 0
Page 122220
BENCH RULING Plaintiff Floyd Culhane filed this diversity action on November 18, 2011, against defendant Janice Culhane. It arises from a long-drawn and bitter dispute between brother and sister over a residential prop*214erty inherited from their deceased mother. Plaintiff seeks a statutory accounting and distribution pursuant to Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52 — 404(b), and alleges unjust enrichment, and...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
JAMES BOLAND, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MAlA FALCONI-SACHS )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civi...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JAVIER LOPEZ CASTRO, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 13-456 (JEB)
MOLECULAR SYSTEMS INC., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On April 9, 2013, Defendant ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs counsel’s Motion to Enforce Charging Lien and Settlement Agreement [dkt. 29]. The Motion has been fully *840briefed. The Court finds that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the parties’ papers such that the decision process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Therefore, pursuant...
Views: 0
Page 122327
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The parties have agreed on very little during the course of this condemnation' action. The three pending motions are no exception. For the reasons given below, EQT has standing to bring this condemnation action and there is no reason to doubt the constitutionality of the statute that grants EQT condemnation authority. However, there is reason to doubt whether EQT meet...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff Ruth Muzueo’s Motion for Class Certification [ECF No. 59]. For the reasons explained in this order, the Court finds that class certification is appropriate.
Factual Background
In this putative class-action lawsuit, Plaintiff has alleged that the Defendants’ alleged debt collection practices violate the Fair D...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND, GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS, AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
Plaintiff Anne Florence Andre-Pearson filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Kent County, Michigan. The complaint included a claim for breach of contract and a claim for exemplary damages. Plaintiff generally asserted that Defendant Grand Valley ...
Views: 0
Page 122349
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Memorandum Opinion addresses Plaintiff Abraham Mallik’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support, ECF No. 21; the Opposition that Defendant Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“DHHS”) filed, ECF No. 27; and Plaintiffs Reply, ECF Ño. 28; as well as Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgme...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff David L. Jamison has filed for summary judgment, arguing that Defendant City of Chicago failed to properly pay Jamison, and other paramedics, one and onehalf times his regular rate of pay for all hours worked over forty hours in a week, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq. (the “FLSA”). The City has cross-filed for partial ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Intercon Solutions, Inc. is a California-based provider of e-recycling services that operates an e-recycling facility in Illinois. Defendant Basel Action Network (“BAN”) is a non-profit Seattle-based corporation that certifies businesses that provide e-recycling services. Inter-con alleges that BAN and its founder and Executive Director, James Puckett (“Pu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Paula Williams filed this suit pro se against Cook County, the Office of the Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County, the Cook County Juvenile Probation Department (the and its Chief Executive Officer, Michael Rohan, the Office of the Independent Inspector General of Cook County (collectively the “County Defendants”)), and two labor organizations, ...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
I. BACKGROUND
On July 19, 2013, Magistrate Judge Kevin Fox, to whom this matter had been referred for supervision of pretrial proceedings, issued an Order (the “Order”). {See Dkt. No. 84.) Magistrate Judge Fox considered plaintiffs’s motion for an order granting them relief from the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PSLRA”) discovery stay, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ERIC DAVID ZEMEKA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1619 (JEB)
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General
of the United States, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action 12-cv-49 (RC)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, and
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY,
Defendan...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DEREK A. JONES,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1454
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER
AND SEWER AUTHORITY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On May 6, 2013, this Co...
Views: 0
Page 122489
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Pending before the Court in this personal injury case is Plaintiff James R. With-row’s (“Plaintiff’ or “Withrow”) Daubert motion (“Daubert Motion”) to exclude opinions and testimony of John A. Desch, P.E., an accident reconstruction expert hired by Defendants John H. Spears (“Spears”) and Trucks on the Run (collectively, “Defendants”). (D.I. 47) Also pending is Plaintiffs motio...
Views: 0
Page 122533
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion (# 85) for Partial Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion (# 91) for Partial Summary Judgment. The parties seek summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ claims for procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution1 and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 706, in which Plaintif...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves a renter who “maintained,” if that is the right word, ninety-five cats and two dogs in a rental house and the manner in which the animals were *1285maintained resulted in physical damage to the house. The owner of the rental house seeks coverage under defendant’s policy of insurance for the damage to the house. The defendant denies the damage is covered as it ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Defendants, Lee Hymowitz and Michael Freeman (“Hymowitz” and “Freeman,” or, collectively, “Defendants”), are charged by Superseding Indictment (the “Indictment”) with conspiracy to commit wire fraud (Count Two), wire fraud (Count Three), conspiracy to commit money laundering (Count Seven), and money laundering (Count Eight). By this motion, Hymowitz and Freeman seek to dismiss t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the court are several motions filed by defendants Aetna Health, Inc. and Aetna Life Insurance Company, Inc. (collectively, “Aetna”) and by the plaintiff, Productive MD, LLC (“Productive MD”).
Aetna has filed a Partial Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 108) (“Motion to Dismiss ERISA-Governed Claims”) and a Partial Motion to Dismiss the Non-ERISA Cla...
Views: 0
*645DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. # 22) IN ITS ENTIRETY; JUDGMENT TO ENTER IN FAVOR OF RESPONDENT AND AGAINST PETITIONER HEREIN, DISMISSING PETITIONER’S PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS WITH PREJUDICE; DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL INFORMA PAUPERIS WITH RESPECT TO ALL CLAIMS; TERMINATION ENTRY The Court has reviewed the June 3...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOE HAND PROMOTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-615 (JEB)
RONALD J. WRIGHT, JR., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this Federal Communic...
Views: 0
Page 122778
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff has brought at least five lawsuits and dozens of grievances against his employer, the United States Postal Service (“Postal Service”), going back to at least 1992, which have triggered at least three appeals to the Circuit, and one remand after the appointment of pro bono counsel that required additional findings but still resulted in the dismissal of the...
Views: 0
Page 122780
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STEVEN D. CAGE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), as Receiver for Colonial Bank (“Colonial”), brings this action against Boris Masarsky and Linda M. Surges (collectively, “Defendants”) asserting breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and negligence. The FDIC’s action arises out of real estate appraisals of a residential property located in Nort...
Views: 0
Page 122862
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ CROSS-MOTION I. INTRODUCTION The County of Alameda has adopted what has been described as a “first in the nation” approach to addressing concerns arising from the disposal of unused prescription drugs. Its “Safe Drug Disposal Ordinance” (the “Ordinance”), scheduled to go into effect in November of this year, requires pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action is about an advertisement that reads: “LP SmartSide products work and cut just like traditional wood, taking nails and screws with ease.” (Dkt. No. 28 (“Defs. Ex.”), Ex. G.) Defendants Louisiana-Pacific Corporation (“Louisiana-Pacific”) and Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Home Depot”) seek summary judgment, dismissing Plaintiffs’ breach of express warranty and false adv...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S CROSS-MOTION FOR JUDGMENT (Docket Nos. 50 & 57).
Plaintiff Kathleen Stout moves for judgment on her claims for disability benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Defendants Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company and Amazon.com Holding, Inc. Long Term Disability Plan cross-move for judg...
Views: 0
ORDER CERTIFYING QUESTIONS TO THE IOWA SUPREME COURT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...................................956
A. Factual Background.................................................957
1. The parties and their relation to each other........................957
2. The facts surrounding Hagen’s ñring..............................957
B. Procedural Background................
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is brought pursuant to §§ 205(g) & 1631(b)(3) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) & 1383(c)(3), to review a final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security denying the claim for Supplemental Security Income benefits brought by Linda Sepulveda on behalf of A.S.1 The parties have filed their briefs, inclu...
Views: 0
Page 123132
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BRETT STEELE,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 12-1867 (BAH)
v.
Judge Beryl A. Howell
HERMAN MEYER, et al.,
Defendants.
...
Views: 0
Page 123133
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________
)
ALFELTON TURNER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civ. Action No. 12-1126 (EGS)
v. )
...
Views: 0
Page 123254
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This adversary proceeding arises in the context of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc. (the “Debt- or”). The original defendants, Michael Koplik and Alvin Siegel (the “Officers”), were officers and directors of the Debtor, a closely held New York corporation that operated as a broker, sales agent, and distributor of various paper products. Defendant Ko...
Views: 0
Page 123282
OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION AND FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE I. INTRODUCTION On March 26, 2009, Maisoun Labaneya filed a Petition for Alien Relative (“Form 1-130”) for her husband Radwan Baytiyeh with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”). Conc...
Views: 0
Page 123311
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Memorandum Opinion addresses the Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment and supporting Memorandum filed by Plaintiff Ron Hunt, ECF No. 13; the Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion and the Cross Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Paul Kadlick, Gokhan Akkus, and AKA, Inc., ECF No. 14; Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendants’ Cross Motion and Plaintiffs Reply to Defe...
Views: 0
Page 123338
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. Introduction
This case is a shareholder derivative action brought by Plaintiff Louisiana Municipal Police Employees’ Retirement System (“LAMPERS”) seeking relief from alleged harm caused by Dan Hesse, Joseph Euteneur, Robert Brust, Paul Saleh, James Hance, Jr., Robert Bennett, Gordon *579Bethune, Larry Glasscock, Janet Hill, Frank Ianna, Sven-Christer Nilsson, William Nuti...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
NILO JEREZ, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Misc. Action No. 09-466 (RWR)
)
REPUBLIC OF ...
Views: 1
ENTRY ON MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’, City of Indianapolis (“the City”), Officers Jonathan M. Lawlis, Robert K. McCauley, Brad Alford, and David Miller (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 56). Plaintiff Willie E. King (“Mr. King”) filed multiple claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”) against Defendants i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Conservation Law Foundation (“CLF”) and Buzzards Bay Coalition, Inc. (“BBC”) bring this case against the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), by suing its Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, and "its Regional Administrator, Curt Spalding, in their official capacities. Plaintiffs assert three claims under the Clean Water Act (the “CWA...
Views: 1
ORDER
This is an intellectual property dispute. Before the court is defendant SBR Marketing Ltd.’s (“SBR”) Motion to Dismiss (# 591). Plaintiffs Stevo Design, Inc. (“Stevo”), Steven Budin, and Alan Rolli have responded (#65), and SBR has replied (# 69). Also before the court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of Default (# 58).
I. Facts and Procedural History
Plaintiff Stevo is a Florida corporati...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are three motions for summary judgment. Defendant, Max Welders, LLC (“Max Welders”), filed a motion for summary judgment as to the *672claims asserted by plaintiffs, Joseph R. Wilcox and Lisa Wilcox, under the Jones Act and general maritime law.1 Max Welders filed a separate motion for summary judgment to dismiss the indemnity cross-claims filed by defendants/...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Nola Spice Design, L.L.C. (“Nola Spice”) and Third Party Defendant Raquel Duarte (“Duarte” or, collectively, “Nola Spice”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 60), Defen*691dant/Counter-Plaintiff Haydel Enterprises, Incorporated, d/b/a Haydel’s Bakery (“Haydel”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 85), and the parties’...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARK DIMONDSTEIN, et al,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-1228 (CKK)
AMERICAN POSTAL WORKERS UNION
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Au...
Views: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 12-1709 (BAH)
v. Judge Beryl A. Howell
CIERA L. BLYTHER, et al.,
...
Views: 0
Page 124008
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO QUASH WRITS OF GARNISHMENT FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION AND DENYING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On December 16, 2011, the Court entered an amended judgment against defendant state district court judge Mark Somers in the amount of $1,173,125.80 (which included prejudgment interest and attorney’s fees) based on a jury award following trial. Now before the Court a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT I. INTRODUCTION The proposed settlement class in this action consists of some 150 million members of defendant Facebook, Inc.’s eponymous social network website, whose names and/or likenesses allegedly were misappropriated to promote products and services through Facebook’s so-called “Sponsored Stories” program. The parties now seek ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Douglas Luckerman, an attorney who formerly represented Defendant Narragansett Indian Tribe (“Tribe”), brought suit against the Tribe in state court for breach of contract, alleging that the Tribe failed to fully compensate him for his services. The Tribe removed the case to federal court and filed the instant motion to dismiss, arguing, among other things, that the ...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this case, plaintiff L-7 Designs, Inc. (“L-7”) and defendant Old Navy, LLC (“Old Navy”) entered into a Creative Services Agreement (the “CSA”) whereby L-7 was to provide Old Navy with creative design services, including “input” on “creative positioning, creative vision and creative strategy.” Old Navy moved for judgment on the pleadings. I granted the motion and dismissed the action....
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the alternative, Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendant City of San Gabriel on May 13, 2013. (Doc. No. 20.) Also before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed on May 13, 2013....
Views: 0
Page 124186
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
SCOTT A. McNAMARA, M.D., )
)
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, )
)
v. ...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STONE & WEBSTER, INC. et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 12-1783 (CKK)
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA :
TRANSIT AUTHORITY, :
:
Petitioner & Counter-Defendant, : Civil Action No.: 12-136 (RC)
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
______________________________
)
NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION )
ASSOCIATION, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 12-1690 (RWR)
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT FORESPAR PRODUCT CORP.’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (# 91)
I. Introduction
This case arises out of a sale of a luxury Yacht, Hull No. 9, from defendant/third-party plaintiff, Hylas Yachts Inc. (“Hylas”), to the plaintiffs, Nelson R. Sharp (“Sharp”) and Destiny Yachts LLC (“Dest...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
The matter before the Court arises from an alleged fraudulent scheme in which Defendant Lawyers Title Insurance Company (“Lawyers”), through various title agents, misrepresented the amount of money due and owing for title insurance. According to Plaintiffs, unsuspecting homeowners who secured mortgages and paid for title insurance were defrauded through the pervasive sch...
Views: 0
*844 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT and DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. BACKGROUND On April 2, 2012, Plaintiffs Stand Up America Now, Wayne Sapp (“Sapp”) and Terry Jones (“Jones”) filed the instant action against Defendants City of Dearborn (“Dearborn”) and Ronald Haddad (“Had-dad”). A First Amended Complaint was filed on July 25, 2012 alleging: Freedom ...
Views: 0
ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Defendants PlastiPure, Inc. and CertiChem, Inc.’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law [# 185], and Plaintiff Eastman Chemical Company’s Response [# 189]; Eastman’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment [# 204], Defendants’ Response [# 209], and Eastman’s Reply [# 214]; Defendants’ Motion f...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on defendant Flowserve Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 272). The Motion has been briefed and is ripe for disposition.1
I. Relevant Background.
This is an asbestos action pending against 11 defendants,2 alleging various state-law tort claims and a wrongful death cause of action based on the alleged exposure of plaintiffs decedent, Rueben Mor...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
________________________________
)
CAROLINE ROBINSON, the Personal )
Representative of the Estate of )
Arnell Robinson, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Case No. 07-CV-1796 (EGS)
...
Views: 0
Page 124525
DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), alleges that the Defendant, Rexnord Industries, LLC (“Rexnord”), fired its employee, Danielle Sullivan (“Sullivan”) either because it regarded her as disabled (by a seizure disorder) or because of her disability (migraines). (Complaint ¶ 9, Docket # 1.) On March 15, 2013,...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
THIS MATTER comes before the Court following a three-day bench trial commencing on July 15, 2013. The parties consented to trial before a United States Magistrate Judge. See Election to Jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge for Trial (DE# 16-1, 1/18/11). This matter was referred to the undersigned by the Honorable Patricia A. Seitz, United Stat...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 41] and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [D.E. 43]. The Court has reviewed the Motions, all supporting and opposing filings, and the record in the case. For the reasons that follow, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in part and denied in part, and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs allege that the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) uses unlawful stops, searches, and arrests to enforce the prohibition against trespassing in New York City Housing Authority (“NYCHA”) buildings.1 This Court has granted in part and denied in part the parties’ motions for summary judgment.2 Plaintiffs now move for certification of the following...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 26.) The Court considered the motion, Plaintiffs response (Dkt. No. 33), Defendant’s reply (Dkt. No. 35) and all related documents. In his response, Plaintiff included a cross-motion for partial summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 33.) As discussed below, this cr...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court are: (a) Motion for Orders to Compel Regarding Mr. Roldan Deposition, Documentation, and Testimony filed by plaintiff, Docket No. 187; (b) Objection to Motion for Orders to Compel Regarding Mr. Roldan Deposition, Documentation and Testimony (Docket No. 187) filed by defendants, Docket No. 190; (c) Reply to Objection to Motion for Orders to Compel Regardin...
Views: 0
Page 124836
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LEICESTER BRYCE STOVELL,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 13-731 (CKK)
LEBRON R. JAMES,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(September 1, 2013)
Plai...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHARON M. HARRISON,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 09-1364 (CKK)
OFFICE OF THE ARCHITECT OF THE
CAPITOL,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Septembe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This lawsuit presents a contract dispute arising out of an April 2009 license agreement between plaintiff Pacific Cycle and defendant PowerGroup International, LLC. The agreement licensed PowerGroup to sell Schwinn-branded motor scooters. Pacific Cycle terminated the agreement in April 2012 due to PowerGroup’s failure to satisfy its payment and reporting obligations, then commen...
Views: 0
Page 124945
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (the “Motion”) [DE 5] filed herein on August 2, 2013. The Court has carefully considered the Motion [DE 5], Defendants’ Response [DE 12], Plaintiffs’ Reply [DE 13], the record, and all other evidence presented at the hearing held on August 16, 2013. The Court is othe...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff’s Motion to Waive Filing Fee Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 4323(h)(1), ECF No. 3, is GRANTED. STATEMENT Before the Court is Plaintiff Scott Palumbo’s (“Palumbo”) Motion to Waive Fil*936ing Fee Pursuant to 88 U.S.C. § 4328(h)(1). ECF No. 3. For the following reasons, the motion is granted. Palumbo alleges that he graduated in the top 10% of his class at the United States Navy Officer ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. (“Classen”) sued Biogen Idee (“Biogen”) and GlaxoSmithKline (“GSK”) (collectively the “defendants”) for patent infringement. Pending is claim construction. On June 7, 2013, the Court held a claim construction hearing.
I. Background1 '
Classen is the assignee of John B. Classen, M.D. (“Dr. Classen”) inventor of the patents in suit. Biogen has licens...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. SUMMARY
On November 8, 2012, five days before respondent Joseph Smith was due to be released from serving his federal prison sentence, the government filed a petition to have him civilly committed pursuant to *16918 U.S.C. § 4246 (the “Petition”).1 The court appointed counsel-for Smith, designated an examiner to perform a psychiatric evaluation of him, considered three e...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Plaintiff Pierre Biel filed a petition in this Court under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (the “Hague Convention”), T.I.A.S. No. 11760, 19 I.L.M. 1501, seeking the return of his son to Luxembourg. Upon learning of an ongoing custody proceeding, the Court raised the issue of abstention sua sponte.1 Having reviewed the state court proc...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT The matter before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”). [Dockets No. 96, 97.] Plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) and Sections 101(3) and 101(31) of Title 38 (“Title 38”) on the basis that these provisions violate the equal protection of the laws guaranteed ...
Views: 0
Page 125185
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, and the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge dated August 1, 2013, *711the Court finds that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, owners of real property in the Village of Roxana, Illinois, allege on their own and on behalf of a putative class, that Defendants, current and former owners and operators of an oil refinery in Roxana, caused *282or allowed hazardous petroleum by-products to contaminate their property (Doc. 5-2). Plaintiffs claim negligence, trespass, public nuisance, private nu...
Views: 0
Page 125198
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
Before the Court are two motions to compel arbitration (D.E. 60, 62) filed by the O’Quinn Defendants1 and Defendant T. Gerald Treece,2 jointly referred to as “Movants.” Defendants Richard N. Laminack, Buffy Martines, and Thomas W. Pirtle filed a consent to arbitration (D.E. 63), claiming that the arbitration agreement in the Power of Attorney and Contingen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff asserts Title VII claims against her former employer, the Veterans Administration. Plaintiff alleges that defendant took adverse employment actions against her because of sex, race and national origin and in retaliation for her complaints of discrimination.1 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment (Doc. # 74) filed February 19...
Views: 0
ORDER
This action arises out of a house fire that resulted in the deaths of plaintiff Coley Gass-awajfs two children. Plaintiff alleges that defendant1 Sunbeam Products, Inc. was negligent in the manufacture, design, inspection, testing, and marketing of certain “space heaters” she purchased and that the fire was caused by defects in one of the subject heaters. Plaintiff seeks wrongful death da...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Donald R. Lovell sued Defendants Champion Car Wash, LLC and Tim Jones, claiming that he was terminated from employment in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., the Tennessee Disability Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 8-50-103, and the Tennessee Human Rights Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-21-101 et seq. He also claims that he was retaliated against for ...
Views: 0
Page 125464
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW In this removed diversity action, plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment that the July 23, 2008 amended inter vivos trust (hereinafter the “2008 Amended Trust”1) of her father, Colonel William P. Oliver, is invalid. The parties conducted full discovery. In the course of discovery, a concern arose that subject matter jurisdiction might be lacking by virtue ...
Views: 0
*534
DECISION AND ORDER
Anthony Washington, appearing pro se, commenced this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff, who was formerly an inmate in the custody of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (“DOCS”), has sued sixteen defendants, all of whom were, at all relevant times, DOCS employees at Southport Correctional Facility, where plaintiff was confined at the time of the...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Edward Bailey brings this action against his former employer, the Village of Pittsford (the “Village”), alleging age discrimination claims pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (“ADEA”). Plaintiff also asserts that the Village unlawfully deprived him of property pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U...
Views: 0
Page 125528
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pending before the Court are the following: (1) Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson’s Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) that the motion for partial default judgment filed by Plaintiffs Johannes Baumgartner Wirtschafts-Und Vermógensberatung GmbH (“JBWV”) and Holger' Knut Theiler (“Theiler,” and together with JBWV, “Plaintiffs”) on their claims for fraud, conversion, unjus...
Views: 0
Page 125558
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
On May 26, 2011, the Plaintiff David Powell (“the Plaintiff’) commenced this action against (1) the Defendants Daniel Murphy (“Murphy”), Robert Suppa (“Sup-pa”) and Donald Truesdell (“Truesdell”), individually and in their official capacities as officers of the Suffolk County Police Department; (2) the Defendant Eileen O’Connell (“O’Connell”), individually; and (3...
Views: 1
Page 125575
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ LEAVE TO AMEND ANSWER AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case involves a hedge fund seeking to recover the money it lent to a financially struggling trucking company. That com*338pany acknowledges it has failed to pay back two loans, but asserts that the loans were invalid because they were usurious.
Background
In the fall of 2011, Plaintiff, a h...
Views: 0
RULING
The Court has carefully considered the petition, the record, the law applicable to this action, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr. dated August 9, 2013. Defendants have filed an objection which the court has considered.
The Court hereby approves the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and adopts it as the Court’s ...
Views: 0
Order Granting Motion For Summary Judgment
Plaintiff Gul Kodwavi brings this action alleging national origin discrimination in *975employment, as well as retaliation and harassment by his former employer, Defendant Intercontinental Hotels Group Resources, Inc. dba Holiday Inn, Civic Center (“the Hotel”), and individual defendants Gino Lazzara (“Lazzara”) and Adriano LoGrasso (“LoGrasso”) (collect...
Views: 0
Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Denying Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
Pending before the Court are cross-motions for partial . summary judgment. Plaintiff U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) filed this ac*953tion against Defendants1 on June 27, 2011 alleging discrimination on the basis of religion in violation of Title V...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case was on the court’s June 28, 2013 calendar for the motion for summary judgment brought by plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on its claims against defendant Lawrence “Lee” Loomis. Jeremy Pendrey and John Yun appeared for the SEC, and Douglas Beevers appeared for Loomis. For the reasons stated below, the court GRANTS the SEC’s motion.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AN...
Views: 0
*1344
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s Final Report and Recommendation [46] (“R & R”) on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [34],
I. BACKGROUND
A. Procedural History
On November 18, 2011, Plaintiff Laura Lee Bernstein (“Plaintiff’) filed this employment discrimination action against her former employer, the Georgia Department of Educat...
Views: 0
Page 125699
MEMORANDUM, ORDER, AND JUDGMENT
This action arises out of the acquisition in late 2006 and early 2007 by Plaintiff Meda AB (“Meda”) of a European pharmaceutical business from Defendant 3M Company (“3M”). Meda alleges that 3M breached the acquisition agreement signed on November 8, 2006 (“Acquisition Agreement”), as well as the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Meda further claims t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cases arises from a transaction between Plaintiffs Bank of America and Banc of America Securities LLC (“BAS”) (collectively “BOA”), and Defendant Bear Stearns Asset Management (“BSAM”) in May of 2007. The transaction led to the creation of a “CDO-squared” — that is, a Collateralized Debt Obligation (“CDO”) comprised of CDOs known as “the Issuer” — constructed out...
Views: 0
Page 125726
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
In this employment action, Plaintiff, Sergeant Marie Rother (“Plaintiff’), brings a number of claims arising out of her treatment by supervisors and co-workers while she was employed by Defendant the NYS Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”). See generally Dkt. No. 23 (“Amended Complaint”). Presently before the Court is Defen...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a civil suit in which plaintiff Linda Bluestein contends that defendant Central Wisconsin Anesthesiology, S.C. discriminated against her on the basis of disability and gender when it terminated her in September 2010. Now before the court are three motions: (1) defendant’s motion to dismiss for discovery violations or, in the alternative, to amend the scheduling order, dk...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
WANDA PATTERSON, parent and )
next friend of A.P., and A.P., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
...
Views: 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________
)
BARBARA HAINES, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
...
Views: 0
RULING RE: MOTION FOR PARTIAL JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (Doc. No. 30)
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Kim Hannah (“Hannah”), Tom Irving (“Irving”), and Michael (“Barham”), (collectively, “the plaintiffs”), bring this action against defendants Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. (collectively, “Wal-Mart”). The plaintiffs allege that they were subjected to race discrimination and retali...
Views: 0
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS; ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE; ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; and ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Char-...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Asher & Simons, P.A. and Dr. Stuart T. Zaller, LLC (“Plaintiffs”) brought this suit against j2 Global, Inc., j2 Global Canada, Inc., Wellington Wreaths, LLC, and several individuals (“Defendants”) alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227, and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (“MCPA”), Md.Code Ann. Com. Law § 14-3201. Now pending befor...
Views: 0
Page 125804
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court are (1) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and (2) Plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court has carefully reviewed the record and deems a hearing unnecessary. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and DENIES Plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKG...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM Defendant Miguel Tesillos pleaded guilty to counterfeiting a permanent resident card, contrary to 18 U.S.C. § 1546, and I set the case for sentencing. In imposing sentence, the district court is required to follow a two-step procedure. First, it must calculate the defendant’s sentencing range under the advisory guidelines. United States v. Boroczk, 705 F.3d 616, 622 (7th Ci...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for breach of contract and fraud arising out of the termination of the Plaintiffs employment. It is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [Doc. 9]. For the reasons set forth below, the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [Doc. 9] is GRANTED.
I. Background
The Plaintiff began working ...
Views: 0