Summary
denying motion to dismiss an ADA claim where the plaintiff had UC, among other conditions, and explaining that "[w]hile it is not certain that [the plaintiff's] conditions will be proven to meet the stringent definition of a 'disability' under the ADA . . . at this early stage of the case it is plausible"
Summary of this case from Dehonney v. G4S Secure Solutions (Usa), Inc.Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-1500
07-11-2013
BARBARA J. WINGARD, Plaintiff, v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE, et al., Defendants.
Judge Cathy Bissoon
Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly
MEMORANDUM ORDER
On December 11, 2012, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(A) and (B), and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules for Magistrates.
On June 21, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report (Doc. 30) recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 18) be denied. Service of the Report and Recommendation was made on the parties, and no objections have been filed.
After a review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following Order is entered:
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 18) is DENIED, and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kelly dated June 21, 2013 is hereby adopted as the opinion of the District Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
Cathy Bissoon
United States District Judge
cc (via ECF email notification): All Counsel of Record