BYNUM v. TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA et al

Filing 29

MEMORANDUM ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 18 ), IS GRANTED, ETC. DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 9 ), IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. DEFENDANTS ' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR SANCTIONC (DOC. NO. 19 ), IS GRANTED, ETC. DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (DOC. NO. 8 ), IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS SHALL ANSWER THE COMPLAINT BY 8/5/2015. THE TWO ABOVE-CAPTIONED ACTIONS ARE CONSOLIDATED FOR ALL PURPOSES AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE C.A. NO. 14-4548 STATISTICALLY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE STEWART DALZELL ON 7/23/2015. 7/24/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(amas)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
BRANDON BYNUM
v.
TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al.

:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 14-4548

_____________________________________________________________________
BRANDON BYNUM
v.
TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al.

:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 15-1466

ORDER
AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2015, upon consideration of defendants’
motion to dismiss (docket entry #9), plaintiff Brandon Bynum’s response in opposition thereto,
defendants’ motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of their motion to dismiss (docket
entry #18), defendants’ motion for sanctions (docket entry #8), Bynum’s response in opposition
thereto, and defendants’ motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of their motion for
sanctions (docket entry #19), and for the reasons set forth in our Memorandum issued this day, it
is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

Defendants’ motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of their

motion to dismiss (docket entry #18) is GRANTED;
2.

The Clerk of Court shall DOCKET Exhibit A as “Defendants’ Reply Brief

in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss;”
3.

Defendants’ motion to dismiss (docket entry #9) is GRANTED-IN-PART

and DENIED-IN-PART as follows;

4.

Counts I, II, V, and the portion of Count VI referring to “interference with

state constitutional rights” are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
5.

Defendants’ motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of their

motion for sanctions (docket entry #19) is GRANTED;
6.

The Clerk of Court shall DOCKET Exhibit A as “Defendants’ Reply Brief

in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions;”
7.

Defendants’ motion for sanctions (docket entry #8) is DENIED;

8.

Defendants shall ANSWER the complaint by noon on August 5, 2015;

9

The two above-captioned actions are CONSOLIDATED for all purposes;

10.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to file all papers in C.A. No. 14-4548

and TRANSFER them to the docket of C.A. No. 15-1466; and
11.

The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE C.A. No. 14-4548 statistically.

BY THE COURT:

_/s/ Stewart Dalzell, J.
Stewart Dalzell, J.

2