WILSON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al

Filing 105

ORDER THAT DEFT'S MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART;. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE L. FELIPE RESTREPO ON 2/22/12. 2/23/12 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(lvj, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CIVIL ACTION

HAROLD C. WILSON
Plaintiff,

v.
CITY OF PIDLADELPIDA, et aI.,
Defendants.

NO. 04-5396
ORDER

NOW, this 22M day ofFebrtllU)', 2012, upon consideration ofthe Motion of Defendaot,
R. Seth Williams, to Dismiss Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint, Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of
the Federai Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. 96) and Plaintiffs Response thereto, for the reasons
provided in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 96) is GRANTED IN PART
and DENIED IN PART;
2. Insofar as Defendant's Motion requests that any and all state law claims
against Defendant Williams be dismissed, Defendant's Motion is GRANTED;
3. Insofar as Defendant's Motion requests that Plaintiffs claims against
Mr. Williams be dismissed as time-barred and for lack of Mr. Williams' personal involvement,
Defendant's Motion is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

L Rt&! rfD
.,,1

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE