From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Roman v. Prince

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 2, 2024
2:22-cv-188 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 2, 2024)

Opinion

2:22-cv-188

01-02-2024

ANIBAL ROMAN, Plaintiff, v. DR. SCOTT PRINCE; DR. JAWAD SALAMEH; and LAUREL HARRY, Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

J. Nicholas Ranjan, United States District Judge.

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly's Report & Recommendation (ECF 61) on Defendant Laurel Harry's Motion to Dismiss (ECF 50) and Plaintiff Anibal Roman's Motion to Strike that motion (ECF 56). Having reviewed the Report & Recommendation and the record in this case for clear error, and having considered that no objections to the Report & Recommendation were filed, the Court finds no clear error on the face of the record.

It is ORDERED that Defendant Harry's Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part, and Plaintiff's Motion to Strike, which the Court construes as a response to the motion, is denied as moot. The Report & Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Because Mr. Roman has already been given leave to amend the complaint as to his ADA claim, the dismissal of that claim as to Defendant Harry is with prejudice, consistent with the Report & Recommendation.


Summaries of

Roman v. Prince

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 2, 2024
2:22-cv-188 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 2, 2024)
Case details for

Roman v. Prince

Case Details

Full title:ANIBAL ROMAN, Plaintiff, v. DR. SCOTT PRINCE; DR. JAWAD SALAMEH; and…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jan 2, 2024

Citations

2:22-cv-188 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 2, 2024)