Vizant Technologies LLC v. Julie Whitchurch

Opinion

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 16-1178

___________

VIZANT TECHNOLOGIES LLC;

JOSEPH BIZZARRO

v.

JULIE P. WHITCHURCH; *JAMIE DAVIS, individuals, Appellants

*Dismissed pursuant to Court’s Order dated 06/29/2016

____________________________________

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civil No. 2-15-cv-00431)

District Judge: Honorable Harvey Bartle III

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

January 5, 2017

Before: SHWARTZ, COWEN and FUENTES, Circuit Judges

___________

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

___________

It appears that the opinion filed January 13, 2017 incorrectly referred to injunction entered the District Court as a preliminary rather than a permanent injunction. Accordingly, it is hereby O R D R E D at the direction of the Court the opinion shall be amended as follows:

For these reasons, appellees’ motion to dismiss this appeal is granted in part, and we will dismiss this appeal as to all orders except (1) the order entering summary judgment and the interlocutory orders related to that issue, (2) the permanent injunction, and (3) the order at ECF No. 215 denying Whitchurch’s Rule 60(b) motion.

The Clerk is directed to file an amended opinion. As the error was typographical in nature the filed date of the judgment shall not be altered.

For the Court,

Marcia M. Waldron, Clerk A True Copy :

Date: February 2, 2017 A True Copy :

Marcia M . Waldron, Clerk

Marcia M . Waldron, Clerk