Legal Opinion

Kia v. Imaging Sciences International, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided August 20, 2010No. Civil Action 08-5611PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

BARTLE, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff Omid Kia (“Kia”) in this diversity action asserts a variety of state law claims against his former employer, Imaging Sciences International, Inc. (“ISI”), and ISPs former owners, Edward Murándola (“Marandola”), Arun Singh (“Singh”), Alan Keim (“Keim”), Henry Tancredi, and John Tancredi.

Before the court is the motion of defendants for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on all counts in Kia’s First Amended Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”).

I

We grant summary judgment “if the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure…

2Cases cited50 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Robin Chamberlain v. Vincent C. Giampapa, M.D., Individually and Dba Plastic Surgery Center InternationaleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
  4. Gianni v. Russell Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  5. Etoll, Inc. v. Elias/Savion Advertising, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Wen v. WillisDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
  2. Downey v. First Indemnity InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2016
  3. Dutch Fork Development Group II v. Sel Properties, LLCSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2012
  4. Stout Street Funding LLC v. JohnsonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
  5. Hartford Fire Insurance v. Lewis (In re Lewis)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API