HART v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al

Filing 88

ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO STRIKE (DOC. NO. 57) IS DENIED AND THE MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 57) IS GRANTED. THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED AS TO DEFT. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 8/14/17. 8/15/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PLFF., MAILED AND E-MAILED TO COUNSEL. (pr, ) (MAILED TO PRO SE AT UPDATED ADDRESS ON 8/15/2017) Modified on 8/15/2017 (md).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOHN HART
v.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.

: CIVIL ACTION
:
: NO. 13-cv-6661
:
:

ORDER

AND NOW, this 14th day of August, 2017, upon consideration of defendant
Aramark Correctional Services, Inc.’s motion to strike and/ or dismiss the second
amended complaint for failure to state a claim, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to
strike [Doc. 57] is DENIED and the motion to dismiss [Doc. 57] is GRANTED.
The Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED as to defendant Aramark
Correctional Services, Inc..

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl
JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL, J.