Vacaflor v. The Pennsylvania State University et al
||Heather Dorman, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania College of Technology and Susan Swank-Caschera
||Marcelo Eddy Vacaflor
||March 5, 2013
||Pennsylvania Middle District Court
||Matthew W. Brann
|Nature of Suit:
||Civil Rights: Education
|Cause of Action:
||42:1981 Sex Discrimination
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|July 21, 2014
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry) re 9 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by The Pennsylvania State University, 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM as to Counts V, VI, and VII ag ainst the Individual Defendants filed by Susan Swank-Caschera, Heather Dorman, Pennsylvania College of Technology, 17 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Plaintiff's AMENDED Complaint filed by The Pennsylvania State University Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 7/21/14. (km)
|July 21, 2014
ORDER: In accordance with the Memorandum of this same and filed previously as record document no. 30, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1.Defendant The Pennsylvania State University's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED 17 and the Defendant is DISMISSED from the action. 2.Defendant The Pennsylvania State University's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED 9 and DISMISSED as moot. 3. Defendants Pennsylvania College of Technology, Heather Dorman, and Susan Swank-Cashera's Motion to Dismiss 8 is DENIED and DISMISSED as moot. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 7/21/14. (km)
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 Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.