Opinion
Civil Action 22-552
06-13-2024
SERGEI KOVALEV v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA HOLDINGS
ORDER
KEARNEY, J.
AND NOW, this 13th day of June 2024, upon considering Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 126), Plaintiffs Response (ECF No. 127), Defendant's Reply (ECF No. 130), Plaintiffs Sur-reply (ECF No. 131), discovery and sanctions Motions (ECF Nos. 106, 112, 121, 128, 134, and 137) unrelated to the issues presented on a summary judgment record as to whether there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Defendant's agents' conduct constituted assault and battery under Pennsylvania law, having repeatedly studied the Plaintiffs video of the seventy-second encounter at issue, following noticed extensive oral argument, and for reasons in today's accompanying Memorandum after finding no genuine issues of material fact and judgment is warranted as a matter of the applicable Pennsylvania law, it is ORDERED we:
1. GRANT Defendant's Motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 126) dismissing Plaintiffs remaining assault and battery claim with prejudice as a matter of law finding no reasonable person could find the conduct detailed in the Plaintiffs video evidence to constitute assault and battery under Pennsylvania law as a liberal interpretation of the video evidence directly contradicts Plaintiffs pro se assault and battery claim;
2. DENY the Motion for sanctions (ECF No. 106), Motion for extension of discovery (ECF No. 112), second Motion for sanctions (ECF No. 121), Motion for Rule 56(d) relief (ECF No. 128), Motion for ruling (ECF No. 134), and Motion for sanctions (ECF No. 137) as moot given both parties agree the issues presented in these motions do not affect our analysis on the summary judgment record and we need not consider preclusionary sanctions given our findings as a matter of law; and, 3. DIRECT the Clerk of Court shall close this case.