Filed: Nov. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER GENE E.K. PRATTER , District Judge . AND NOW, this 20th day of November, 2017, upon consideration of the Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 72), Intervenor Pennsylvania Innocence Project's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 76), the parties' Responses and Replies thereto (Doc. Nos. 83, 88, 91, 93, 98, 102), and Oral Argument held on October 2, 2017, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 72) is GRANTED. 2. The Intervenor the Pennsylvania Inn
Summary: ORDER GENE E.K. PRATTER , District Judge . AND NOW, this 20th day of November, 2017, upon consideration of the Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 72), Intervenor Pennsylvania Innocence Project's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 76), the parties' Responses and Replies thereto (Doc. Nos. 83, 88, 91, 93, 98, 102), and Oral Argument held on October 2, 2017, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 72) is GRANTED. 2. The Intervenor the Pennsylvania Inno..
More
ORDER
GENE E.K. PRATTER, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 20th day of November, 2017, upon consideration of the Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 72), Intervenor Pennsylvania Innocence Project's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 76), the parties' Responses and Replies thereto (Doc. Nos. 83, 88, 91, 93, 98, 102), and Oral Argument held on October 2, 2017, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 72) is GRANTED.
2. The Intervenor the Pennsylvania Innocence Project's Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 76) is deemed MOOT.
