MUIR et al v. AM SOLUTIONS, LLC et al

Filing 43

ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT IS DENIED INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ISSUE OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER DEFENDANT LAW OFFICES OF DAMIAN G. WALDMAN, P.A. DEFENDANT LAW OFFICES OF DAMIAN G. WALDMAN, P.A. SHALL R EMAIN A DEFENDANT IN THIS CASE. THE MOTION TO DISMISS SHALL REMAIN OPEN, BUT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT IT RELATES TO THE ISSUES OF WHETHER THE AMENDED COMPLAINT SHOULD BE DISMISSED PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6). PLAINTIFFS SHALL HAVE UNTIL 5/3/2019 TO FILE A RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' RULE 12(b)(6) ARGUMENTS. DEFENDANTS SHALL HAVE UNTIL 5/10/2019 TO FILE A REPLY. GIVEN THE PROTRACTED NATURE OF JURISDICTIONAL DISCOVERY AND TEH BRIEFING SCHEDULE AS SET FORTH ABOVE, THIS CASE SHALL REMAIN IN SUSPENSE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 4/17/2019. 4/18/2019 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ADOLPH MUIR, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 18-729

v.
AM SOLUTIONS, LLC, et al.,
Defendant.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 17th day of April 2019, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 20), Plaintiffs’ Amended Response and CrossMotion to Stay (Doc. No. 22), Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Memorandum Regarding the Exercise of
Personal Jurisdiction Over Defendant Law Offices of Damian G. Waldman, P.A. (Doc. No. 40),
and Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 41),
the arguments of counsel at the hearing held on November 19, 2018, and in accordance with the
Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 20) is DENIED,
insofar as it relates to the issue of personal jurisdiction over Defendant Law Offices of
Damian G. Waldman, P.A. Defendant Law Offices of Damian G. Waldman, P.A. shall
remain a Defendant in this case.
2. The Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 20) shall remain open, but only to the extent that it
relates to the issue of whether the Amended Complaint should be dismissed pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
3. Plaintiffs shall have until May 3, 2019 to file a Response in Opposition to Defendants’
Rule 12(b)(6) arguments.

4. Defendants shall have until May 10, 2019 to file a Reply.
5. Given the protracted nature of jurisdictional discovery and the briefing schedule as set
forth above, this case shall remain in SUSPENSE.

BY THE COURT:

/ s/ J oel H. S l om sk y
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.