IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
April 1, 2009
JESSE O. JOHNSON, JR., PETITIONER
FRANKLIN J. TENNIS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Christopher C. Conner United States District Judge
AND NOW, this 1st day of April, 2009, upon consideration of petitioner's motion (Doc. 24) to strike respondents' answer (Doc. 17) and motion to dismiss (Doc. 16), wherein petitioner expresses confusion regarding the clarity of the numbered paragraphs in respondents' motion (Doc. 16) to dismiss, and it appearing that respondents' have filed an amended motion (Doc. 26) to dismiss, which rectifies the deficiencies identified by petitioner's motion (Doc. 24) to strike,*fn1 it is hereby
1. Petitioner's motion (Doc. 24) to strike is DENIED as moot.
2. Respondents' first motion (Doc. 16) to dismiss is DENIED. The denial does not reflect the court's disposition on the merits of the amended motion (Doc. 26).