Curran v. M& T Bank Corporation et al
Filing
29
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the R&R of MJ Schwab. 1)Plaintiff Currans amended complaint (Doc. No. 3) is DISMISSED with prejudice;2) Defendant M&Ts motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 13) is GRANTED; 3) Defendant the Law Firms, Gates, and Shafiks motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 17) is GRANTED; 4) Defendant the Law Firms Gates, and Shafiks motion for sanctions (Doc. No. 20) is DENIED; and 5) Plaintiff Currans motion to strike (or alternatively construed as his sur-reply) (Doc. No. 27) is STRICKEN from the record. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Clerk of Court shall close the case. 17 28 13 3 20 Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 1/13/14. (sc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHN F. CURRAN, III
Plaintiff
v.
M&T BANK CORPORATION, et al.
Defendants
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12-cv-749
(Judge Kane)
(Magistrate Judge Schwab)
ORDER
Before the court in the captioned action is a December 3, 2013 Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. No timely objections have been filed.
Accordingly, this 13th day of January 2014, upon review of the record and the
applicable law, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Court adopts the Report and
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Schwab.
1) Plaintiff Curran’s amended complaint (Doc. No. 3) is DISMISSED with
prejudice;
2) Defendant M&T’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 13) is GRANTED;
3) Defendant the Law Firm’s, Gates’, and Shafik’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No.
17) is GRANTED;
4) Defendant the Law Firm’s Gates’, and Shafik’s motion for sanctions (Doc. No.
20) is DENIED; and
5) Plaintiff Curran’s motion to strike (or alternatively construed as his sur-reply)
(Doc. No. 27) is STRICKEN from the record.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Clerk of Court shall close the case.
s/ Yvette Kane
YVETTE KANE, District Judge
United States t Districtn Courta n i a
M i d d l e D is tric o f P e n s ylv
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?