U.S. Third Circuit: November 2010 Archives
U.S. Third Circuit - The FindLaw 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

November 2010 Archives

W. Penn Allegheny Health Sys., Inc. v. UPMC, 09-4468

Pittsburgh's second-largest hospital system's antitrust suit against the state's largest hospital system and health insurer for conspiracy to protect one another from competition

W. Penn Allegheny Health Sys., Inc. v. UPMC, 09-4468, concerned a challenge to the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's Sherman Act claims, and consequent refusal to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims, in an antitrust suit by Pittsburgh's second-largest hospital system against Pittsburgh's dominant hospital system and health insurer under the Sherman Act and state law, claiming that defendants violated sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by forming a conspiracy to protect one another from competition.

US v. Ward, 09-4271

Sentence and a $100,000 fine vacated and remanded in prosecution of defendant for child-pornography and related offenses

US v. Ward, 09-4271, concerned a prosecution of defendant for inducing a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for purposes of producing a visual depiction of that conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 2251(a), shipping visual depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and for making false statements to the United States Department of State to secure a visa.

Ray v. Township of Warren, 09-4353

Caretaking community exception to warrantless entry

Ray v. Township of Warren, 09-4353, concerned a plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 against several police officers, claiming that the officers violated his Fourth Amendment right against unlawful searches when they entered his home while investigating concerns expressed by his estranged wife about their daughter.

Thomas v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 08-4593

District court's partial remand of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security vacated

Thomas v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 08-4593, concerned a challenge to the district court's order partially remanding a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, denying plaintiff's claim for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act.  In vacating and remanding, the court held that the district court abused its discretion in its order when it remanded a single issue to the ALJ for clarification without directing the ALJ to fully develop the record prior to rendering an explanatory decision.

Houck v. Stickman, 05-4580

Claim of actual innocence to overcome procedural default

Houck v. Stickman, 05-4580, concerned a challenge to the district court's denial of defendant's request for habeas relief from his convictions for kidnapping, aggravated assault, and related offenses.  In affirming, the court held that defendant has not satisfied the Schlup requirement to open the actual innocence door to allow his procedurally defaulted claims to be considered on the merits as, even taking into account evidence of defendant's affidavits, he has not demonstrated that no reasonable juror would convict him after considering the newly supplemented record.

Related Link:

Delgado-Sobalvarro v. Attorney General, 08-1679

Nicaraguan citizens' petition for review of BIA's dismissal of their application for adjustment status affirmed

Delgado-Sobalvarro v. Attorney General, 08-1679, concerned a Nicaraguan citizens' petition for review of the BIA's dismissal of their application for adjustment status.  In denying the petition, the court held that the petitioners are not eligible to adjust status under section 245 on the basis of their section 236 conditional parole as a conditional parole under section 236 does not constitute parole into the United States for the purposes of adjustment of status under section 245.  Further, the court rejected petitioners' due process claims are rejected, and also held that petitioners cannot demonstrate prejudice from any delay in adjudicating the I-130 petitions.

Related Link:

Shook v. Avaya Inc., 09-4043

Summary judgment for employer in plaintiffs' suit alleging violation of ERISA affirmed

Shook v. Avaya Inc., 09-4043, concerned a husband and wife's suit against husband's former employer alleging a violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), claiming that the employer breached its fiduciary duty owed to them as participant and beneficiary under the employer pension plan through a series of misleading letters regarding the husband's pension benefits.