BOYER v. MOHRING et al

Filing 60

ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS RICE AND MOHRING'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOC. NOS. 20, 41) ARE GRANTED ON THE ONLY CLAIM REMAINING. ALL PENDING MOTIONS ARE DENIED AS MOOT. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 1/10/2014. 1/10/2014 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE, E-MAILED AND SENT TO LEGAL. (aeg, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA BRIAN E. BOYER, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-2267 v. DEBORA MOHRING and BYRON RICE, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 10th day of January 2014, upon consideration of Defendant Rice’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 20) and Plaintiff’s Response (Doc. No. 24), Defendant Mohring’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 41), Defendants Vega and McQuate’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 16) and Plaintiff’s Response (Doc. No. 24), and the arguments of counsel at the November 22, 2013 hearing, it is ORDERED that: 1. Defendants Rice and Mohring’s Motions to Dismiss (Doc. Nos. 20, 41) are GRANTED on the only claim remaining (illegal search and seizure under 42 U.S.C. § 1983). 2. All pending Motions are DENIED as MOOT. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case for statistical purposes. BY THE COURT: / s/ J oel H. S l om sk y JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J. 16

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?