Patricia Anne Gaughan

“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”

“this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the Union's Complaint and this case must be dismissed.”

“For the reasons set forth above, Defendant Coach, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is DENIED.”

“For the foregoing reasons, Federal Defendant Timothy Shook's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”

28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B) screening dismissal of a pro se IFP complaint (no plausible 1983 claim; private-party defendant, no state action). Grounding quote: 'the Court finds that Plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed. The complaint, even liberally construed, fails to state any plausible federal claim upon which the Court may grant him relief.' This screening disposition did not resolve a litigated motion.

“For the reasons stated above, plaintiff’s product liability claims are barred by Ohio Revised Code § 2305.10. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.”

“For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.”

“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.”

“For the reasons stated above, defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.”

“For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted.”

“For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is granted except as to the four FOIA requests discussed herein. The case is stayed as to those requests pending plaintiff’s exhaustion of his administrative remedies.”

“For all the aforementioned reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is granted and this case is dismissed.”

“State Farm’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Counts 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10 of Thornton’s Complaint and DENIED as to Counts 1, 2, 6 and 7.”