PETRULIO v. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED et al

Filing 54

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO STRIKE THE REPORT AND EXCLUDE THE PROPOSED EXPERT TESTIMONY OF DR. JON YOUNGER IS DENIED. PLAINTIFF MOTION TO STRIKE THE REPORT AND PRECLUDE THE PROPOSED EXPERT TESTIMONY OF DR. CHARLES SODIKOFF IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE EXPERT REPORT AND TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY FROM THE CENTER FOR FORENSIC ECONOMIC STUDIES REFERRING UPON THE REPORT OF DR. CHARLES SODIKOFF IS GRANTED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAN E. DUBOIS ON 11/4/14. 11/5/14 ENTERED AND E-MAILED.(jl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
LINDA PETRULIO,

CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiff,

v.
TELEFLEX INCORPORATED, and
TELEFLEX MEDICAL
INCORPORATED,
Defendants.

NO. 12-7187

ORDER
AND NOW, this 4th day of November, 2014, upon consideration of Motion for
Summary Judgment of Defendants Teleflex Incorporated and Teleflex Medical Incorporated
(Document No. 22, filed February 26, 2014); Plaintiff’s Brief in Opposition to Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 34, filed March 26, 2014); Defendants Teleflex
Incorporated and Teleflex Medical Incorporated’s Reply in Support of Their Motion for
Summary Judgment (Document No. 43, filed May 2, 2014);1 Plaintiff’s Surreply in Opposition
to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 46, filed May 16, 2014);
Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report and Exclude the Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Jon
Younger (Document No. 24, filed March 4, 2014); Defendants Teleflex Inc. and Teleflex
Medical, Inc.’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report
and Preclude the Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Jon Younger (Document No. 32, filed
March 25, 2014); Plaintiff’s Reply Brief in Futher [sic] Support of Motion to Strike Report and
Exclude Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Younger (Document No. 38, filed April 8, 2014);
Defendants Teleflex Inc. and Teleflex Medical, Inc.’s Sur-reply in Further Opposition to

1

Defendants filed a redacted copy of this reply and its attachments on May 28, 2014.
(Document No. 51).

Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report and Preclude the Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Jon
Younger (Document No. 39, filed April 16, 2014); Brief in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to
Strike the Report and Preclude the Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Charles Sodikoff
(Document No. 26, filed March 4, 2014); Defendants, Teleflex Inc. and Teleflex Medical, Inc.’s
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report and Preclude the
Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Charles Sodikoff (Document No. 30, filed March 25, 2014);
Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Portions of the Expert Report and to Exclude Testimony from the
Center for Forensic Economic Studies Referring to or Relying Upon the Report of Dr. Charles
Sodikoff (Document No. 25, filed March 4, 2014); Defendants, Teleflex Inc. and Teleflex
Medical, Inc.’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Portions of
the Expert Report and to Exclude Testimony from the Center for Forensic Economic Studies
Referring to or Relying Upon the Report of Dr. Charles Sodikoff (Document No. 31, filed March
25, 2014); and the related submissions of the parties, for the reasons stated in the accompanying
Memorandum dated November 4, 2014, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1.

That part of defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 22)

seeking dismissal of plaintiff’s claim of sex discrimination based on her termination and
dismissal of plaintiff’s claims relating to her demotion and failure to promote as discrete acts
under Title VII and the PHRA is GRANTED. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is
DENIED in all other respects;
2.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report and Exclude the Proposed Expert

Testimony of Dr. Jon Younger (Document No. 24) is DENIED;
3.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report and Preclude the Proposed Expert

Testimony of Dr. Charles Sodikoff (Document No. 26) is GRANTED to the extent it seeks to

2

exclude the following opinions of Dr. Sodikoff: (1) plaintiff has not conducted a “reasonable and
diligent job search to mitigate her loss by finding comparable employment . . . .”; (2) if plaintiff
had conducted a “reasonable and diligent job search . . . she would have found a comparable
position within 4–12 months”; (3) if plaintiff conducts a “reasonable and diligent” job search,
she will be able to fully mitigate her loss by establishing her own consulting practice; and
(4) plaintiff’s documentation shows that she is no longer looking for a permanent, full-time
position or additional consulting work. Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Report and Preclude the
Proposed Expert Testimony of Dr. Charles Sodikoff is DENIED in all other respects;2 and
4.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Portions of the Expert Report and to Exclude

Testimony from the Center for Forensic Economic Studies Referring to or Relying Upon the
Report of Dr. Charles Sodikoff (Document No. 25) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a telephone conference for the purpose of scheduling
further proceedings will be conducted in due course.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Hon. Jan E. DuBois_ _
DuBOIS, JAN E., J.

2

As discussed in the accompanying Memorandum dated November 4, 2014, Dr. Sodikoff
will be permitted to testify at trial, subject to plaintiff’s right to object to inadmissible evidence,
as to other matters to the extent that his testimony offers information that is relevant to the issue
of plaintiff’s mitigation and that lies outside the knowledge of a layperson.
3