BLOOM v. CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM

BLOOM v. CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM

Plaintiff:	SANDEE BLOOM
Defendant:	CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM
Case Number:	2:2013cv01442
Filed:	October 4, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Pittsburgh Office
County:	Allegheny
Presiding Judge:	Maurice B. Cohill
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
January 31, 2014	Filing 17 OPINION & ORDER re 8 MOTION to Strike or, in the alternative MOTION to dismiss filed by CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM indicating that the motion is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant's motion to strike is GRANTED as to paragraph 12 and paragraphs 14-33. Paragraph 12 and paragraphs 14-33 are hereby stricken from Plaintiff's Amended Complaint; Defendant's motion to strike is DENIED as to the remaining challenged paragraphs; Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED as moot as Court finds that Plaintiff has not asserted claims of sexual harassment or hostile work environment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Courts is hereby DIRECTED to place UNDER SEAL the initial Complaint and Amended Complaint, which are contained as Exhibit A (ECF No. 1-1) to Defendant's Notice of Removal (ECF No. 1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended Complaint in accord with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) and the Opinion accompanying this Order by 2/14/2014; Defendant's response due by 2/28/2014.Signed by Judge Maurice B. Cohill on 1/31/2014. (rtw)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 31, 2014

Filing 17 OPINION & ORDER re 8 MOTION to Strike or, in the alternative MOTION to dismiss filed by CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM indicating that the motion is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant's motion to strike is GRANTED as to paragraph 12 and paragraphs 14-33. Paragraph 12 and paragraphs 14-33 are hereby stricken from Plaintiff's Amended Complaint; Defendant's motion to strike is DENIED as to the remaining challenged paragraphs; Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED as moot as Court finds that Plaintiff has not asserted claims of sexual harassment or hostile work environment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Courts is hereby DIRECTED to place UNDER SEAL the initial Complaint and Amended Complaint, which are contained as Exhibit A (ECF No. 1-1) to Defendant's Notice of Removal (ECF No. 1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended Complaint in accord with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) and the Opinion accompanying this Order by 2/14/2014; Defendant's response due by 2/28/2014.Signed by Judge Maurice B. Cohill on 1/31/2014. (rtw)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: BLOOM v. CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM
Represented By:	Adam M. Barnes
Represented By:	Gretchen J. Fitzer
Represented By:	Trisha A. Gill
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: SANDEE BLOOM
Represented By:	Christian Bagin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?