SAMAHON v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Filing 31

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 22) IS GRANTED ON COUNTS ONE, TWO, AND THREE OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 16). PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 24) IS DENIED ON C OUNTS ONE, TWO, AND THREE OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 16); ETC.. THE DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO FILE THE ELWOOD MEMORANDUM UNDER SEAL FOR AN IN CAMERA INSPECTION WITHIN TWENTY DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 2/27/2015. 2/27/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (ems)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TUAN SAMAHON, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-6462 v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant. ORDER AND NOW, this 27th day of February 2015, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 22), Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 24), Defendant’s Response in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc No. 25), Plaintiff’s Reply to Response to Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 28), and in accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 22) is GRANTED on Counts One, Two, and Three of the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 16). 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 24) is DENIED on Counts One, Two, and Three of the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 16.) 3. The Court will reserve judgment on Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s Motions for Summary Judgment on Count Four of the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 16), pending the results of an in camera inspection of the Elwood Memorandum. 4. The Defendant is ORDERED to file the Elwood Memorandum UNDER SEAL for an in camera inspection within twenty days of the date of this Order. BY THE COURT: /s/ Joel H. Slomsky JOEL H. SLOMSKY, 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?