DOE v. THE TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Filing
59
MEMORANDUM ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 19 ), IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OULTINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOHN R. PADOVA ON 9/13/2017. 9/13/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(amas)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHN DOE
v.
THE TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 16-5088
ORDER
AND NOW, this 13th day of September, 2017, upon consideration of Defendant The
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 19), and all
documents filed in connection therewith, and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying
Memorandum, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART as follows:
1.
The Motion is GRANTED insofar as it seeks dismissal of Counts IV, VI, VII, and
VIII; the portion of Count I that claims that Defendant breached contractual
obligations with respect to fairness, notice, the preponderance of the evidence
standard, an impartial hearing, the recommended sanctions, appeal, and racial
discrimination or bias; and the portion of Count II that asserts a Title IX violation
grounded on a deliberate indifference theory. Counts IV, VI, VII and VIII, and the
specified portions of Counts I and II are therefore DISMISSED.
2.
The Motion is DENIED insofar as it seeks dismissal of Count V; the portion of
Count I that is grounded on alleged breaches of contractual obligations to conduct a
thorough investigation, to train investigators and hearing officers, and to provide a
process that is free of gender bias or gender discrimination; and the portion of
Count II that asserts a Title IX violation grounded on erroneous outcome and
selective enforcement theories.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ John R. Padova, J.
__________________________________
John R. Padova, J.
2
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?