Legal Opinion
Damiano v. Inst. for in Vitro Scis.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided March 13, 2018No. Civil Action No. PX–16–920Published
1Opinion of the Court
Paula Xinis, United States District Judge
Pending in this action is a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Institute for In Vitro Sciences (IIVS). ECF No. 37. The issues are fully briefed, and the Court now rules pursuant to Local Rule 105.6 because no hearing is necessary. For the following reasons, IIVS' motion is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
Unless otherwise noted, the following facts are undisputed. Damiano was employed by IIVS as an Accounting Assistant/HR Coordinator from February 3, 2014, until her termination on September 9, 2015. ECF No. 1 at 3-4. IIVS maintained a group health…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Iko v. ShreveCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2008
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.