Regassa v. Brininger et al
| Admassu Regassa |
| C. Brininger, S Argueta, A. Kranzel, E. Kulp, Gregory George, Lt. Sherman, Francis Fasciana, Kevin Pigos, J. Oldt, M. Erb, M. Edinger, A. Jordan, N. Beaver, B. Chambers, Dowkus, Carrasquilo, Lt. Saylor, J. Seeba, A. Miller, S. Buebendorf, C. Wise, D. Johnson, J. Eck, Chucky Anderson, M Hackenberg, F. Entzel, AW Wilson, J. E. Thomas and United States Federal Bureau of Prisons |
| 4:2014cv01122 |
| June 11, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Williamsport Office |
| Union |
| JV |
| Matthew W. Brann |
| Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
340
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Final judgment is entered in favor of the United States of America and against Regassa as to Regassa's remaining FTCA claim; and the Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 7/29/2020. (jr)
|
|
Filing
304
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Regassa's 271 Motion in Limine is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; The United States' 282 Motion in Limine is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and Regassa's 285 287 Motions for subpoenas are DENIED without prejudice. (See Order for further details.) Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 5/11/2020. (jr)
|
|
Filing
231
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 202 Regassa's motion for reconsideration is denied; 223 Defendants' motion for reconsideration is granted; judgment is entered in favor of Defendants with respect to all Bivens claims. The sole remaining claim is Regassa's FTCA assault claim related to the alleged July 8, 2013 assault. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 8/14/19. (lg)
|
|
Filing
221
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 218 Magistrate Carlson's Report and Recommendation is adopted in its entirety; 192 Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is granted. (see order for further/complete details) Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 3/12/19. (lg)
|
|
Filing
201
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 179 remaining Defendants' motion for summaryjudgment is construed as seeking partial summary judgment and is partially granted; summary judgment is grante d in favor of Defendants Bubebendorf and Wise on the basis of law of personal involvement; Defendant Kulp's request for entry of summary judgment is denied; (see order for further/complete details) Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 9/27/18. (lg)
|
|
Filing
112
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry): dfts' dispositive motion is construed as solely seeking entry of summary jugment within respect to the Bivens portion of the amended complaint; dfts motion (doc 49) is partially grant ed; entry of summary judgment will be granted in favor of the individual defendants with respect to the Bivens portion of the amended complaint. (see order for further/complete details and deadlines)Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 12/20/16. (lg)
|
|
Filing
91
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry)Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 8/26/16. (km)
|
|
Filing
43
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry) re Defendants' motion for summary judgment 24 . Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 9/4/15. (km)
|
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
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
