RAVEN v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IS GRANTED. THE MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED AS TO COUNTS I AND II AND THOSE COUNTS ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6). SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOHN R. PADOVA ON 3/8/17. 3/9/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mbh, ) Modified on 3/9/2017 (fb). (Main Document 25 replaced on 3/9/2017) (mbh, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.
AND NOW, this 8th day of March, 2017, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 22) and Plaintiff’s Response
thereto, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED, as follows:
The Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to Counts I and II and those Counts are
dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6);
The Court DECLINES to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the
Pennsylvania state law claims contained in Counts III, IV, and V, and those
claims are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), without prejudice to
Plaintiff reasserting those claims in state court.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ John R. Padova, J.
John R. Padova, 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?