Filed: Jul. 24, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 24, 2012
Summary: ORDER MARY A. McLAUGHLIN, Judge. AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2012, upon consideration of the plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Docket No. 6), the defendants' response (Docket No. 18), the plaintiff's reply in support (Docket No. 22), the defendants' brief in further opposition (Docket No. 24), and following oral argument on July 11, 2012, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons stated in a memorandum of law bearing today's date, that the motion to remand is GRANTED. This matter is REMANDED to t
Summary: ORDER MARY A. McLAUGHLIN, Judge. AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2012, upon consideration of the plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Docket No. 6), the defendants' response (Docket No. 18), the plaintiff's reply in support (Docket No. 22), the defendants' brief in further opposition (Docket No. 24), and following oral argument on July 11, 2012, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons stated in a memorandum of law bearing today's date, that the motion to remand is GRANTED. This matter is REMANDED to th..
More
ORDER
MARY A. McLAUGHLIN, Judge.
AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2012, upon consideration of the plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Docket No. 6), the defendants' response (Docket No. 18), the plaintiff's reply in support (Docket No. 22), the defendants' brief in further opposition (Docket No. 24), and following oral argument on July 11, 2012, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons stated in a memorandum of law bearing today's date, that the motion to remand is GRANTED.
This matter is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. The Court declines to make an award of costs and fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). Such an award is left to the discretion of the district court. Mints v. Educ. Testing Serv., 99 F.3d 1253, 1260 (3d Cir. 1996).
