Cramer v. Cecil Baker & Partners, Inc., 19-1503. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20190703g23
Visitors: 1
Filed: Jul. 01, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 01, 2019
Summary: ORDER BERLE M. SCHILLER , District Judge . AND NOW , this 1st day of July 2019 , upon consideration of Defendant Hidden City Philadelphia's Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff Cramer's response, and for the reasons stated in this Court's Memorandum dated July 1, 2019, it is ORDERED that: 1. The motion (Document No. 17) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part . 2. Plaintiff Cramer's copyright action is DISMISSED without prejudice for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 3
Summary: ORDER BERLE M. SCHILLER , District Judge . AND NOW , this 1st day of July 2019 , upon consideration of Defendant Hidden City Philadelphia's Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff Cramer's response, and for the reasons stated in this Court's Memorandum dated July 1, 2019, it is ORDERED that: 1. The motion (Document No. 17) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part . 2. Plaintiff Cramer's copyright action is DISMISSED without prejudice for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 3...
More
ORDER
BERLE M. SCHILLER, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 1st day of July 2019, upon consideration of Defendant Hidden City Philadelphia's Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff Cramer's response, and for the reasons stated in this Court's Memorandum dated July 1, 2019, it is ORDERED that:
1. The motion (Document No. 17) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
2. Plaintiff Cramer's copyright action is DISMISSED without prejudice for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
3. Defendant Hidden City Philadelphia's request for a hearing on sanctions is DENIED.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
Source: Leagle
