HEPNER v. THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS, INC.
Filing
16
MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 10) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAN E. DUBOIS ON 5/24/2013. 5/29/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (ems)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WILLIAM HEPNER
CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiff,
v.
THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY
HOSPITAL,
Defendant.
NO. 12-5443
ORDER
AND NOW, this 24th day of May, 2013, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to
Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (Document No. 10, filed January 15, 2013),
Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Document No.
11, filed January 23, 2013), and Defendant’s Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s
First Amended Complaint (Document No. 14, filed February 1, 2013), for the reasons set forth in
the Memorandum dated May 24, 2013, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as
follows:
1.
That part of defendant’s Motion which seeks a dismissal of plaintiff’s claims of
interference under the FMLA for (1) failing to properly designate time off from work by plaintiff
as FMLA time, and (2) failing to provide plaintiff with individualized notifications of his rights,
obligations and entitlements under the FMLA, under the Second Cause of Action of the Amended
Complaint, is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to plaintiff’s right to file a second amended
complaint consistent with the Memorandum dated May 24, 2013, within twenty (20) days if
warranted by the facts.
2.
Defendant’s Motion is DENIED in all other respects.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a preliminary pretrial conference will be scheduled in
due course.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Hon. Jan E. DuBois
DuBOIS, JAN E., J.
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?