PEASE v. FARO TECHNOLOGIES

Filing 20

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FLE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. PLAINTIFF SHALL FILE HIS AMENDED COMPLAINT BY 2/26/16. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 2/22/16. 2/23/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mbh, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
GREGORY D. PEASE,
Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 15-3586

v.
FARO TECHNOLOGIES,
Defendant.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 22nd day of February 2016, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion
for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 17) and Defendant’s Opposition (Document
No. 18), and in accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED that
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 17) is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint as to Count I for
Wrongful Discharge with Specific Intent to Harm and Count II for Wrongful
Discharge in Violation of Public Policy is DENIED;
2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint as to Count III for Breach
of Contract and Count IV for a violation of the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and
Collection Law 43 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 260.1 et seq. is GRANTED;
3. Plaintiff shall file his Amended Complaint by February 26, 2016; and
4. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. 6) is DENIED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.
BY THE COURT:

/s/ Joel H. Slomsky
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.