PEDRO v. CITY FITNESS LLC et al
Filing
83
ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 58 , THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOC. NOS. 60 - 61 , 81 ), IT IS ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS ARE GRANTED. THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 58 IS DISMISSED. ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS ARE DENIED. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 3/30/18. 3/30/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE, UNREP AND E-MAILED.(ti, ) Modified on 3/30/2018 (lisad, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CARMENCITA MARIA PEDRO,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 15-04964
v.
CITY FITNESS, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 30th day of March 2018, upon consideration of the Second Amended
Complaint (SAC) (Doc. No. 58), the Motions to Dismiss the SAC (Doc. Nos. 60-61, 81),
Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition (Doc. Nos. 64-65), Defendants’ Reply (Doc. No. 68), and in
accordance with the Court’s Opinion issued this day, it is ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the SAC (Doc. Nos. 60-61, 81) are GRANTED.
2. The SAC (Doc. No. 58) is DISMISSED.
3. All outstanding motions are DENIED.
4. The Clerk of Court shall close this case for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Joel H. Slomsky, J.
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, 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?