Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dora Schwartz, et al v. Victory Security Agency

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


June 29, 2011

DORA SCHWARTZ, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
VICTORY SECURITY AGENCY,LP,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Arthur J. Schwab United States District Judge

ELECTRONICALLYFILED MEMORANDUM ORDER OF COURT RE. PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE AN INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL (Doc. No. 18)

On June 14, 2011, this Court entered an Order granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint (Doc. No. 6) and dismissing all of Plaintiffs' claims, except for "uniform maintenance work", without prejudice for Plaintiffs to file an Amended Complaint on or before June 29, 2011. Doc. No. 16. By the same Order, Plaintiffs' claim for uniform maintenance work was dismissed with prejudice. Id.

Presently before this Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Take an Interlocutory Appeal of the Dismissal of the Uniform Maintenance Claim.*fn1 Doc. No. 18. Plaintiffs request that the previous Order granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be amended, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292, to add language indicating that there is "substantial ground for difference of opinion" as to whether uniform maintenance work is barred by the Portal to Portal Act and therefore, that "an immediate appeal therefrom will materially advance the disposition of this litigation." Doc. No. 18-1. This Court is vested with the discretion to grant or deny certification for interlocutory appeal. 28 U.S.C. 1292(b). Such exercise of discretion is not reviewable by the United States Court of Appeals. Pfizer, Inc. v. Lord, 522 F.2d 612 (8th Cir. 1975).

The Court finds that its Memorandum Opinion applied the Portal to Portal Act in the present case based upon the specific factual circumstances of this case and that such resultant findings would not contribute to the determination, at an early stage, of a wide range of cases. Therefore, the specific issue in the present case, decided on factual determinations, is not appropriate for interlocutory review. See Link v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, 550 F.2d 860 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. den., 431 U.S. 933.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Take Interlocutory Appeal (Doc. No. 18) is DENIED. s/ Arthur J. Schwab

All Registered ECF Counsel and Parties


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.