FULLMAN v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ANDREW FULLMAN, CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, POLICE NO. 22-4282 COMMISSIONER DANIELLE OUTLAW, CHARLES KING, SGT. CUNNINGHAM, MICHAEL GORMLEY, LAWRENCE SAMUEL KRASNER, and JOHN DOE, Defendants.

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 17th day of October, 2023, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiff Andrew Fullman’s Amended Complaint (ECF Nos. 45 and 46) and all responses thereto (ECF No. 58), it is hereby ORDERED that the Motions are GRANTED and Fullman’s Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant referred to in the caption as “John Doe” is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.1 Accordingly, Fullman’s Motion for Reconsideration regarding his Motion for Discovery (ECF No. 64) is DENIED as MOOT. The Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE this matter and mark it CLOSED. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Wendy Beetlestone, J.

_______________________________ WENDY BEETLESTONE, J.

1 See Hallett v, Doe, Nov. 5, 2019, 2019 WL 5722005 (E.D.Pa. 2019)