LACEY-ECHOLS v. MURPHY

WILLIAM BASSLER, District Judge

This matter having come before the Court on the petition of Defendant Guy Murphy, M.D. to have this Court certify that he was acting within the scope of his employment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(3); and on the motion of the Government to dismiss and remand;

The Court having considered the submissions of the parties; and

The Court having decided this matter without oral argument pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; and

For the reasons set forth in the Court's Opinion issued this day; and

For good cause shown;

IT IS on this 17 day of December, 2003, hereby ORDERED that Murphy's petition is denied; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Government's motion to dismiss claims against it as a substitute defendant for Dr. Murphy is granted; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that because the Government's motion to dismiss and for remand of the remainder of the case is contingent on a future event, i.e. Plaintiffs' withdrawal of their claims against NCHC, the Government's motion is dismissed without prejudice; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that once Plaintiffs withdraw their claims against NCHC, the Government may renew its motion to dismiss and for remand of the remainder of this action.