SMALL v. JOHNSON et al

Filing 20

ORDERED THAT: 1. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO RECLASSIFY SMALLS MOTION IN OPPOSITION AS A RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS AND TERMINATE SMALLS MOTION. 2. THE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS SMALLS COMPLAINT IS GRANTED. 3. THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE COURTS MEMORANDUM. NO LEAVE TO AMEND IS GRANTED. 4. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE. SIGNED BY DISTRICT JUDGE NITZA I QUINONES ALEJANDRO ON 6/3/2024. 6/3/2024 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. MAILED TO PRO SE. (sg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ELWOOD SMALL
Plaintiff
v.
THEODORE W. JOHNSON, et al.
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 23-CV-4809

ORDER
AND NOW, this 3rd day of June, 2024, upon consideration of Elwood Small’s pro se
Complaint (ECF No. 1), the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 16), Small’s Motion in
Opposition (ECF No. 18), and Defendants’ Reply (ECF No. 19) it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to reclassify Small’s “Motion in Opposition”

as a “Response” to the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and terminate Small’s Motion.
2.

The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Small’s Complaint is GRANTED.

3.

The Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for the reasons stated in the

Court’s Memorandum. No leave to amend is granted.
4.

The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.

BY THE COURT:
/s/ Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro
NITZA I. QUIÑONES ALEJANDRO
Judge, United States District Court