LUO v. OWEN J. ROBERTS SCHOOL DISTRICT et al

Filing 59

ORDER THAT LUO'S MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION (NO. 14-6454, DKT. NO. 49; NO. 15-2952, DKT. NO. 33; NO. 15-4248, DKT. NO. 22) ARE DENIED. LUO'S MOTION TO STAY THE COMPLAINT OF THE CASE 15-4248 AND OPEN THE CASE (NO. 14-6354, DKT. NO. 50 & NO. 14-6354, DKT. NO. 23) IS DENIED. LUO SHALL HAVE UNTIL 12/23/2016, TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT. FAILURE TO FILE THIS DOCUMENT BY THAT DATE SHALL RESULT IN THE DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF ALL CLAIMS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN MY 10/31/2016 AMENDED ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE THOMAS N. ONEILL, JR ON 11/28/16. 11/29/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ti, ) Modified on 11/29/2016 (ti, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JENN-CHING LUO,

:
:
CIVIL ACTION
v.
:
:
NO. 14-6354
OWEN J. ROBERTS SCHOOL
:
(consolidated with Civ. A. No.
DISTRICT, GEOFFREY BALL, and
:
15-4248)
CATHY A. SKIDMORE
:
____________________________________:_________________________________________
:
OWEN J. ROBERTS SCHOOL
:
DISTRICT
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
v.
:
:
NO. 15-2952
B.L., by and through his parent,
:
JENN-CHING LUO,
:

ORDER
AND NOW, this 28th day of November 2016, upon consideration of (1) Jenn-Ching
Luo’s Motion for Reconsideration in Civil Action No. 14-6354 (No. 14-6354, Dkt. No. 49),
Cathy A. Skidmore’s response (No. 14-6354, Dkt. No. 52), Sharon Montanye, Esq.’s response
(No. 14-6354, Dkt. No. 51), Owen J. Roberts School District and Geoffrey Ball’s response (No.
14-6354, Dkt. No. 55) and Luo’s reply briefs (No. 14-6354, Dkt. Nos. 53 and 57); (2) Luo’s
Motion for Reconsideration in Civil Action No. 15-2952 (No. 15-2952, Dkt. No. 33), Sweet
Stevens Katz & Williams, LLP, Jonathan P. Riba, Esq. and Sharon W. Montanye, Esq.’s
response (No. 15-2952, Dkt. No. 34), the School District’s response (No. 15-2952, Dkt. No. 35)
and Luo’s reply brief (No. 15-2952, Dkt. No. 36); (3) Luo’s Motion for Reconsideration in Civil
Action No. 15-4248 (No. 15-4248, Dkt. No. 22), Sharon Montanye, Esq.’s response (No. 154248, Dkt. No. 24) and Luo’s reply brief (No. 15-4248, Dkt. No. 25) and (4) Luo’s motion to
stay the complaint of the case 15-4248 and open the case 15-4248 (No. 14-6354, Dkt No. 50 &

No. 14-6354, Dkt No. 23), the School District and Geoffrey Ball’s response (No. 14-6354, Dkt.
No. 54 & No. 15-4248, Dkt. No. 23), Brian Schneider’s response (No. 15-4248, Dkt. No. 26) and
Luo’s reply briefs (No. 14-6354, Dkt. No. 57 & No. 15-4248, Dkt. No. 25 & 27), it is hereby
ORDERED as follows:
1.
Luo’s motions for reconsideration (No. 14-6354, Dkt. No. 49; No. 15-2952, Dkt.
No. 33; No. 15-4248, Dkt. No. 22) are DENIED.
2.
Luo’s motion to stay the complaint of the case 15-4248 and open the case (No.
14-6354, Dkt No. 50 & No. 14-6354, Dkt No. 23) is DENIED.
3.
Luo shall have until December 23, 2016 to file a second amended consolidated
complaint in Civil Action No. 14-6354 setting forth all claims not dismissed with
prejudice in either Civil Action No. 14-6354 or Civil Action No. 15-4248. Failure to file
this document by that date shall result in the dismissal with prejudice of all claims
dismissed without prejudice in my October 31, 2016 amended order.

_ /s Thomas N. O’Neill, Jr.______
THOMAS N. O’NEILL, JR., J.

2