WOLFINGTON v. RECONSTRUCTIVE ORTHOPAEDIC ASSOCIATES II, P.C. et al

Filing 23

ORDER THAT DEFT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS UNDER F.R.C.P. 12(c), OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY JUDGMENT UNDER F.R.C.P. 56 (ECF NO. 10), IS GRANTED & THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE. PLFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFT' ;S COUNTERCLAIM UNDER F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) (ECF NO. 8) IS GRANTED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLFF SHALL HAVE UNTIL 1/13/2017 TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MICHAEL M. BAYLSON ON 12/22/16. 12/22/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(kw, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ANDREW WOLFINGTON
Plaintiff,
vs.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-cv-4935

RECONSTRUCTIVE ORTHOPAEDIC
ASSOCIATES II, P.C. a/k/a The Rothman
Institute
Defendant.
ORDER

And NOW, this 2ih day of December 2016, for the reasons stated in the foregoing
memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), or in the alternative, Summary Judgment under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 (ECF No. 10), is GRANTED, and the Complaint is
dismissed, with prejudice.

Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim Under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(l) (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED, without prejudice.
It is further ORDERED, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ll(c)(3), that

Plaintiff shall have until January 13, 2017 to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed.
Defendant shall have fourteen ( 14) days to respond.

O:\Jessica.2016\16-cv-4935, Wolfington v. ROA \Order Re D Motion for Judgment on Pleadings and P Motion to Dismiss
Counterclaim.docx