'Sborder. Defendant's Motion To Dismiss (doc. 4 ) Is Denied, Without Prejudice. Plaintiff's Responses (see Docs. 7 & 8 ) Allege That He Was Not Served (or Had Not Yet Received) A Copy Of The Motion; And He Questions Defense Counsel's Efforts To Meet And Confer With Him Consistent With The Order Dated 5/26/23 (doc. 2 ). Accordingly, By 6/28/23, Defendant Shall (re)engage The Meet And Confer Process And, As Appropriate, May Renew The Motion To Dismiss. Should A Renewed Motion Be Filed, It Shall Be Accompanied By A Certificate Of Service (as Was The Original Motion), Through Which Counsel Certifies, As An Officer Of The Court, That She Has Served The Filing(s) On Plaintiff In The Manner Specified. Given That Plaintiff Has Received This Court's Orders, The Undersigned Has No Reason To Doubt That Defendant's Service Of Renewed Motion Papers, By First-class U.s. Mail, Will Be Received By Plaintiff. Finally, Plaintiff's Suggestion That The Undersigned Should Recuse Is Rejected. Thus Far, All The Court Has Done Is Enter Standard Orders Filed In Any Case Such As This. Plaintiff Has Not Been "bullied," And The Court Has Every Intention Of Treating Him Fairly, And The Same As It Would Any Other Litigant. Placing Aside The Fact That (until Now) All Orders Have Been Standard Orders, Plaintiff's Disagreement (present Or Future) With The Undersigned's Rulings Does Not Establish Grounds For Recusal. Securacomm Consulting, Inc. V. Securacom Inc., 224 F.3d 273, 278 (3d Cir. 2000). Signed By Judge Cathy Bissoon On 6/15/23. Text-only Entry; No Pdf Document Will Issue. This Text-only Entry Constitutes The Order Of The Court Or Notice On The Matter. (dcd) Staff Note: A Copy Of This Filing Will Be Sent To Plaintiff, Via First-class U.s. Mail, At His Address Of Record. (entered: 06/15/2023)'
'Sbupdate Answer Deadline: Renewed Motion To Dismiss (or Answer) Due From Chuck Mathews On 6/28/23. (dcd) (entered: 06/15/2023)'
Case number 2:23-cv-00875-LPL was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on May 25.