KASHKASHIAN v. MARKY et al, No. 2:2016cv03755 - Document 43 (E.D. Pa. 2017)

Court Description: OPINION/ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NOS. 28, 30 AND 37) ARE DENIED. THE MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 22) IS GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THE MOTION TO DIMSISS (DOC. NO. 35) IS GRANTED WITH PREJUDICE AND THESE DEFENDANTS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THIS ACTION, ETC. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SERVICE (DOC. NO. 23) IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 11/17/17. 11/17/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE' AND E-MAILED. (ky, )
Download PDF
KASHKASHIAN v. MARKY et al Doc. 43 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ERIC KASHKASHIAN, CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-3755 Plaintiff, v. DR. JOHN MARKEY, JOSH BUCHANAN, CHRISTINA C. CREGAR, CHRISTINA A. KING, DR. ABBEY CASSIDY, PATRICIA SNYDER and BLAKE JACKMAN, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 17th day of November, 2017, upon review of all pending motions in this matter, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s Motions for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Docket Nos. 28, 30 and 37) are DENIED 1; 2. The Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Markey and Cassidy (Docket No. 22) is GRANTED without prejudice, and Plaintiff shall be permitted to file one final amendment to his complaint as to Defendants Cassidy and Markey if he can do so in compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 3. The Motion to Dismiss of Defendants Buchanan, Cregar, Jackman and King (Docket No. 35) is GRANTED with prejudice and these defendants shall be removed from this action. Plaintiff is directed that any amended complaint he files shall not include Defendants Buchanan, Cregar, Jackman and King; 1 Docket No. 28 attempts to add the Honorable Wallace Bateman, Jr, the judge who entered the order transferring Plaintiff to Norristown State Hospital, as a defendant. However, Judge Hartman is entitled to judicial immunity and will not be added to this suit. Docket No. 37 is denied as duplicative of Docket No. 30 and is therefore denied. Docket No. 30 seeks to add exhibits to the Amended Complaint and is denied because pursuant to an order dated April 27, 2017, Plaintiff was directed that this Court would allow no further amendment to his Amended Complaint. Dockets.Justia.com 4. The Motion to Dismiss of Defendant Snyder is GRANTED without prejudice, and Plaintiff will be permitted to file one final amendment to his complaint as to Defendant Snyder if he can do so in compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures; 5. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment claims based on alleged HIPAA violations are dismissed with prejudice; and 6. Plaintiff’s Motion for Service (Docket No. 23) is DENIED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl Jeffrey L. Schmehl, J. 2