RODENBAUGH v. SANTIAGO et al
OPINION/ORDER THAT THE OUTSTANDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOC. NOS. 21, 22) ARE GRANTED AND DENIED. PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT ALEX THOMAS ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDWARD G. SMITH ON 1/18/17. 1/18/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE', UNREP AND E-MAILED.(ky, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JUDGE SANTIAGO, JASON
ADDUDDELL, TRACY BONDALL, and
CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-2158
AND NOW, this 18th day of January, 2017, after considering the outstanding motions to
dismiss (Doc. Nos. 21, 22); and the responses in opposition to the motions to dismiss (Doc. Nos.
24, 25); and for the reasons set forth in the separately-filed memorandum opinion, it is hereby
ORDERED as follows:
The motion to dismiss filed by the defendant, Jason Adduddell (Doc. No. 21) is
GRANTED, and the claims against Jason Adduddell are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
The motion to dismiss filed by the defendant Tracy Boandl (Doc. No. 22) is
DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and CONVERTED to a motion for summary judgment as
The plaintiff has until February 7, 2017 to present evidence sufficient to
establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding: (1) her failure to exhaust the Lehigh County
Jail grievance procedures with respect to her claims that Tracy Boandl deprived her of access to
telephone calls and mail, and prevented her from communicating with her attorney and the court,
and (2) whether Tracy Boandl deprived her of access to telephone calls and mail, and prevented
her from communicating with her attorney and the court;
The defendant Tracy Boandl also has until February 7, 2017 to present
any additional evidence or argument in support of her converted motion for summary judgment;
The plaintiff’s claims against the defendant, Alex Thomas, are DISMISSED
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Edward G. Smith
EDWARD G. SMITH, J.
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?