WALKER v. INTERNATIONAL RECOVERY SYSTEMS, INC. et al
ORDER THAT THE MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOC. NO. 10) IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PURSUANT TO THIS COURT'S SUA SPONTE REVIEW, THE MATTER IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE ON RIPENESS GROUNDS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE ROBERT F. KELLY ON 7/8/2013. 7/8/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(amas)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
INTERNATIONAL RECOVERY SYSTEMS,
INC. & JEREMY CROSS,
AND NOW, this
day of July, 2013, upon consideration of the Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 10) filed by Defendants, International Recovery Systems, Inc.
and Jeremy Cross, against Plaintiff, Lynette Walker, and Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition
thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that
pursuant to this Court’s sua sponte review, the matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE on ripeness grounds.1
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Robert F. Kelly
ROBERT F. KELLY
Considerations of ripeness are sufficiently important that the court must raise the issue sua
sponte when the parties do not. Nextel Commc’ns of the Mid-Atlantic Inc. v. City of Margate, 305 F.3d
188, 192 (3d Cir. 2002); Felmeister v. Office of Attorney Ethics, 856 F.2d 529, 535 (3d Cir. 1988).
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?