SHARIFI v. AMERICAN RED CROSS et al
ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT AMERICAN RED CROSS PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 41) AND DEFENDANT HEALTH PROFESSIONAL & ALLIED EMPLOYEES (HPAE) MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 42), AS WELL AS PLAINTIFFS FAILURE TO RESPOND TO EITHER MOTION ARE GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE CHAD F. KENNEY ON 8/1/22. 8/1/22 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(jaa, )
Case 2:21-cv-02873-CFK Document 53 Filed 08/01/22 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
AMERICAN RED CROSS, et al.,
AND NOW, this 1st day of August 2022, upon consideration of Defendant
American Red Cross’ Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 41) and Defendant
Health Professional & Allied Employees’ (“HPAE”) Motion to Dismiss (ECF No.
42), as well as Plaintiff’s failure to respond to either motion, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Motions are GRANTED as follows:
1. Plaintiff’s Claim Two alleging Intentional Discrimination and
Wrongful Discharge in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Age Discrimination in
Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), Title 29 CFR § 1607.11, and 42
U.S.C. 1981a is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to both
Defendant American Red Cross and Defendant HPAE.
2. The Clerk of Court is instructed to terminate Defendant HPAE in this
Case 2:21-cv-02873-CFK Document 53 Filed 08/01/22 Page 2 of 2
Defendant American Red Cross must submit its Answer to the sole
remaining claim, Claim One alleging violation of Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) as to Defendant American Red Cross, 1 on or before Monday, August 15,
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Chad F. Kenney
CHAD F. KENNEY, JUDGE
The Court previously dismissed this Claim with prejudice as to Defendant HPAE in its Order dated January 12,
2022. ECF No. 23. The Court reminds Plaintiff that this Claim may not be raised with respect to Defendant HPAE
and the Court will not consider any accusations against Defendant HPAE related to claims that have ben dismissed
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?