CREDICO v. BOKHARI et al, No. 2:2016cv03726 - Document 30 (E.D. Pa. 2017)
Court Description: OPINION/ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 19) IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 22) IS DENIED. PLAINTIFF MAY FILE AND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AGAINST DEFENDANT BOKHARI ONLY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 7/6/17. 7/7/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE' AND E-MAILED. (ky, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
CREDICO v. BOKHARI et al Doc. 30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JUSTIN CREDICO, CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-3726 Plaintiff, v. FDC PHILA MLP BOKHARI, FDC PHILA HHS CMDR BAKER, and FDC PHILA CMDR MURPHY, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 6th day of July, 2017, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 19), Plaintiff’s “Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment” (Docket No. 22), and all responses, replies and exhibits filed by both parties, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Docket No. 19) is GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice as to Defendants Baker-Bartlett and Murphy as they are immune from suit in this matter, and without prejudice as to Defendant Bokhari; 3. Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days against Defendant Bokhari ONLY if he can do so in compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and Dockets.Justia.com 4. Plaintiff’s “Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment” (Docket No. 22) is DENIED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl Jeffrey L. Schmehl, J. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
