Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
5 opinions for “Nadine Pellegrino v. TSA”
Nadine Pellegrino v. TSApublic domain
PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ No. 15-3047 ________________ NADINE PELLEGRINO; HARRY WALDMAN, Appellants v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Div. of Dept. of Homeland Security; TSA TSO NUYRIAH A
Nadine Pellegrino v. TSApublic domain
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 15-3047 _____________ NADINE PELLEGRINO; HARRY WALDMAN, Appellants v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TR
Pellegrino v. U.S. Transp. SEC. Admin.public domain
KRAUSE, Circuit Judge. In Vanderklok v. United States , 868 F.3d 189 (3d Cir. 2017), we declined to imply a Bivens cause of action against airport screeners employed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in part because they "typicall
Pellegrino v. U.S. of Am. Transp. Sec. Admin.public domain
D. Brooks Smith, Chief Judge A majority of the active judges having voted for rehearing en banc in the above captioned cases, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The Clerk of this Court shall list the case for rehearing en banc on February 20, 2019. The opinion and judgment entered July 11, 2018 are hereby vacated.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOYNER, Chief Judge. Before this Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 40), Plaintiffs Response in opposition thereto (Doc. No. 63), Defendants’ Reply (Doc. No. 66) and Plaintiffs Sur-Reply (Doc. No. 76). For the reasons set forth in this Memorandum, the Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. FACTUAL