DOE v. The Pennsylvania State University et al
Filing
48
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry): IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Plaintiff's 11 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED. (See Order for further details.) Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 8/18/2017. (jn)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHN DOE,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE
:
UNIVERSITY, THE PENNSYLVANIA
:
STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF
:
TRUSTEES, ERIC J. BARRON, individually:
and as agent for The Pennsylvania State
:
University, PAUL APICELLA, individually :
and as agent for The Pennsylvania State
:
University, KAREN FELDBAUM,
:
individually and as agent for The
:
Pennsylvania State University,
:
KATHARINA MATIC, individually and as :
Agent for The Pennsylvania State University, :
:
Defendants.
:
No. 17-CV-01315
(Judge Brann)
ORDER
AND NOW, this 18th day of August 2017, in accordance with the
accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary
Injunction (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED;
-1-
2. Penn State is immediately enjoined from enforcing its June 27, 2017
suspension and exclusion of Plaintiff, John Doe, from The Pennsylvania
State University and the Penn State–Jefferson seven (7) year pre-med
program.
3. Penn State shall immediately permit and assist the Plaintiff, John Doe, in
registering for classes necessary for participation in the Penn State-Jefferson
seven (7) year pre-med program for the Fall 2017 Semester which begins on
August 21, 2017. Said registration and participation by Doe is to be
effectuated in accordance with Penn State’s practice, utilized during the
prior academic year, of separating Doe and Roe.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
United States District Judge
-2-
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?