FRATTAROLA et al v. MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM OF SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA et al

Filing 185

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 146) IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR EXPEDITED COLLECTIVE ACTION NOTIFICATION (DOC. NO. 114), PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR EXPEDITED HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR EXPEDITED NOTICE TO AFFECTED EMPLOYEES (DOC. NO. 117), AND PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STAY NON-FLSA CLAIMS (DOC. NO. 150) ARE DENIED AS MOOT. THE PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND IS GRANTED. THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE THIRTY DAYS TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT. SIGNED BY HONORABLE CYNTHIA M. RUFE ON 9/8/2011. 9/9/2011 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED. (ems)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA __________________________________________ : SUSAN FRATTAROLA, et al., : Plaintiffs, : v. : CIVIL NO. 09-cv-5533 : MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM OF : SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA, et al., : Defendants. : __________________________________________: ORDER AND NOW, this 8th day of September 2011, upon consideration of this Court’s attached Memorandum Opinion and Order, and for the reasons stated therein and hereby incorporated, it is hereby ORDERED: 1) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED [doc. no. 146]; and 2) In view of the dismissal, the following motions are DENIED AS MOOT a) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Expedited Collective Action Notification [doc. no. 114];1 and, b) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Expedited Hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Expedited Notice to Affected Employees [doc. no. 117]; and, c) 3) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay Non-FLSA claims [doc. no. 150]. The Plaintiffs’ request for leave to amend is GRANTED. The plaintiffs have thirty days to file a second amended complaint It is so ORDERED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Cynthia M. Rufe _____________________ CYNTHIA M. RUFE, J. 1 This motion was improperly docketed as a “Motion to Certify.”

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?