Anthony Joseph Scirica

How Judge Scirica rules, drawn from 7 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Scirica no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Position
district
Status
Retired 1987
Served
1984–1987
Appointed by
Ronald Reagan (Republican)
Commissioned
1984-09-18
Education
Wesleyan University, B.A., 1962; University of Michigan Law School, J.D., 1965
Signed orders read
7

How Judge Scirica decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In a trademark-injunction dispute, Scirica required direct support for likely confusion and did not treat alleged copying as a substitute for that proof.

“plaintiff presented no direct evidence of confusion or likelihood of confusion. Neither am I persuaded that the additional consideration of defendant’s intentional copying establishes likelihood of confusion.”

Procedural preferences

In a labor-contract action, Scirica enforced contractual exhaustion and limitations requirements before allowing an employee’s claim to proceed.

“because he has failed to attempt to exhaust his contractual remedies and because of the bar of the statute of limitations, I must grant both defendant’s motions for summary judgment.”

Cautions

In a federal challenge involving unsettled Pennsylvania guardianship terms, Scirica regarded the first interpretation as better left to the state courts.

“Both parties agree that the interpretation of these phrases is a matter of first impression in Pennsylvania. I maintain that such interpretations are best left to state court judges.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

United States v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc.
· 1986-12-04
Motions to dismiss indictment (defendants) Denied

“For the reasons stated, defendants’ motions to dismiss the indictment are denied.”

Smith v. Wood
· 1986-09-17
Motions to dismiss (defendant family members) Granted

“For the reasons stated above, I grant defendant family members’ motion for failure to state a claim.”

Motions to dismiss (Judge Lawrence Wood) Granted

“I further dismiss Judge Wood from this lawsuit as an improper party because plaintiff has failed to allege an Article III case or controversy against the judge.”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“That request is now moot.”

In Re Fleming Construction Corporation
· 1986-07-18
Bankruptcy appeal (creditor-appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is denied and the Order of the bankruptcy judge is affirmed.”

Lawrence v. United States of America Interstate Commerce Commission
· 1986-03-07
Summary judgment (federal defendants) Granted

“Finding that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, I grant the defendants’ motion.”

A.J. Canfield Co. v. Concord Beverage Co.
· 1985-12-23
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“I need not reach the other preliminary injunction factors, and must deny the request for preliminary injunctive relief.”

Aiello v. Apex Marine Corp.
· 1985-05-22
Summary judgment (Marine Engineers Beneficial Association) Granted

“I must grant both defendant’s motions for summary judgment.”

Summary judgment (Apex Marine Corporation) Granted
Heller v. United States
· 1985-03-21
Motions to dismiss (United States) Granted

“Since I have found that the FTCA does not apply to this action and that § 1089(f) does not provide immunity to military medical personnel which requires the substitution of the United States as a party, I will dismiss this matter.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The reviewed decisions predate representative electronic case-level dockets. The profile therefore makes no claim about complete caseload mix, case duration, administrative dispositions, or motion timing.

A historical record

Judge Scirica no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.